How does a Calvinist KNOW they are elect?

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1-

So your saying God asks the impossible to prove to people they need Him? Usually when someone commands something of you they know your able to accept or refuse.

yes , God does ask the impossible , God's claims are not one jot diminished by man's inability to respond without Grace.

If a person has made himself unable to pay a fine , that has no real effect upon the requirement.

also salvation isn't designed after what is "usual" . it is designed to proclaim how bad man is , and how Good God is.

 

[Monergism]

So should an elect murder it is OK for him, its that simple. About the "until he has asked", thats not up to the person to ask. An elect doesnt have the option to ask or not ask for forgiveness, it is impossible for him to not ask for forgiveness, so "until he asks" means nothing more than part of the green light to sin and repent process.

About the "breaking the commandment" thing, the elect person doesnt care if he broke a commandment, it has no bearing on him.

I didn't say it was all right for him. It's a wicked thing to murder. And it is possible for him to not ask. It would be called apostasy, and if he were to not ask, we would know that he wasn't of the elect. What a way to go on teaching anti-nomianism. I guess that when David broke two commandments, he didn't care that he broke them. No, he was just asking for forgiveness for the heck of it. There was no true intention behind it.

But a true elect doesnt bother with what is on earth, ask Job, all things are temporary, if he loses some posession then no big deal when compared to Heaven. It doesnt have to even be David, it can be any elect who gets off scot free, Heaven is not lost, everything else pales in comparison to Heaven.

Oh, Job was getting to the point, I'm sure.

 

[Catholic Dude]

Monergism-

Is not that quote of Noah, and not of David?

my bad, i misread.

Do you not realize that grapes are not gathered from thornbushes or figs from thistles? So too, every good tree bears good fruit, and every bad tree bears bad fruit, for a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Thus, we will know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-20). But, this won't satisfy the issue. If person A is not elect, and person B is elect, and both commit murder, person A is going to hell, regardless of what he did anyway, and person B will be saved. However, if person B does not ask God to forgive him, and if person B does not repent, then he is also not of the elect. We know that person A would never ask God to forgive him, because A doesn't believe in God, but B does. Murder is a terrible thing, and even if the elect were to commit such a crime, I would hope that he was just as repentant as David was.

But its impossible for person B not to ask for forgiveness. Therefore, when B does commit a huge sin, its part of the process for him to go get forgiven right afterwards. At the end you said "even if the elect were to commit", elect do commit, not maybe, they are capable and do commit.

I do not see them as steps, for how can the man who has no knowledge of Christ, have faith in Him, if he doesn't even know God? Just as these are godly fruits, I see them just as I see the fruits mentioned in Galatians 5:22, 23. They are numerous, yet the are as one, for if you have love, you will also have kindness, and with kindness, gentleness, for there is one Spirit who bears many fruits, but all these fruits are like grapes on a twig. That's how I see it.

And for verse 9, I see this as a possibility of falling into apostasy. A person who des not grow in the virtues listed above, he may have forgotten about the salvific work of Jesus Christ, thus, he falls back into his old sins. Paul does not declare that salvation is by works, but rather, he wants believers to live in such a way that their election is assured.

Im at a loss of how to understand how apostacy is possible. Apostacy as I understand it mean that they were once elect, later they are not. How is apostacy possible, you keep mentioning it, but I cant figure it out.

So? "Am I a God near at hand," says the LORD, "And not a God afar off? Can anyone hide himself in secret places, so I shall not see him?" says the LORD; "Do I not fill heaven and earth?" says the LORD (Jeremiah 23:23, 24). God is omnipresent. I don't think we should limit His presence.

Im not saying God is not ominpresent, Im talking about Jesus, who was God in the flesh, when He was pulled and beat he bled and was disfigured. Where ever He went his flesh and blood body were there. That case of the Cross, that man was right there for Jesus to talk and reply to him, just as the people who individually asked Him for something and he gave them a reply all through the Gospels.

Then I suppose this argument here is irrelevant, for neither side has a case. But your interpretation is rather interesting. To each his own.

How do we not have a case? And how is my "interpretation" interesting? These are Biblical facts:
-Paul was Baptized
-Paul Baptized people
-Others Baptized people
-nobody was refused a Baptism

Hm, yes, in the last days, God will send strong delusions. Who knows? We too could be believing that we are saved, and in reality, we are not.

So you agree with my original "thesis" that a person becomes Calvinist because they assume they are elect?

But his fruit didn't follow, so, yeah.

How can you say that? You dont know how he died. For all we know he could have spent the last moments of his life in sackcloth and ashes and fasting and in continuous prayer and lamentations, donating all he had in his bank accounts to charity. We dont know if fruits did or didnt follow, if he was elect and repented at the end he is saved.

 

[Monergism]

my bad, i misread.

It's fine.

But its impossible for person B not to ask for forgiveness. Therefore, when B does commit a huge sin, its part of the process for him to go get forgiven right afterwards. At the end you said "even if the elect were to commit", elect do commit, not maybe, they are capable and do commit.

The only reason person B would ask for forgiveness is because person B has God's grace. If he did not, then he wouldn't ask for forgiveness. I suppose you are correct to say that it would be impossible for person B to not ask. But I hope you don't think that Calvinists believe that it's all right for the elect to continue in sin, because we would be falling under antinomianism if this were the case. If we were to see that those who profess to be Christians, but live in sin, then we know that they aren't truly Christians. They only speak of Christianity, but they don't live it. "Just because one speaks of heaven doesn't mean he's entering it."

Im at a loss of how to understand how apostacy is possible. Apostacy as I understand it mean that they were once elect, later they are not. How is apostacy possible, you keep mentioning it, but I cant figure it out.

There are those who believe they are of the elect, and there are those who are of the elect. Everyone, even sinners, are commanded to repent and believe. The elect will obviously repent and believe, because God granted them to do so. It's what like Jesus said about the seeds. The first doesn't even take root, because the bird took the seed. The second rises up, but then withers away. The third sprouts up, stays up, but thorns grow around it. And the fourth rises up and makes more and more. Remember that an apostate is one who once was in a faith, but left that faith. And those who leave the faith, they truly were not Christians, as John says. Those who endure to the end, however, they are true Christians.

Im not saying God is not ominpresent, Im talking about Jesus, who was God in the flesh, when He was pulled and beat he bled and was disfigured. Where ever He went his flesh and blood body were there. That case of the Cross, that man was right there for Jesus to talk and reply to him, just as the people who individually asked Him for something and he gave them a reply all through the Gospels.

I still find your argument poor. Sure, God was in the flesh, and the man was right there for Jesus to talk and reply to Him, but nevertheless, even prophets and the people of the old were able to speak to God. After all, God the Father was still in heaven, and Christ still stated His omnipresence by declaring that if two or more are gathered in His name, He is there with them (I know, you're not saying that God is not omnipresent). You can go and believe this if you want, but I just don't think it's the best argument.

How do we not have a case? And how is my "interpretation" interesting? These are Biblical facts:
-Paul was Baptized
-Paul Baptized people
-Others Baptized people
-nobody was refused a Baptism

Paul was baptized: Act 9:18
Paul baptized people: 1 Corinthians 1:14-16
Others baptized people: Where?
Nobody refused a baptism: Where?

So you agree with my original "thesis" that a person becomes Calvinist because they assume they are elect?

No, just that "A person can feel and show sings but he was really deceived the whole time." I even included myself last, saying to you that you and I could probably be a reprobate.

How can you say that? You dont know how he died. For all we know he could have spent the last moments of his life in sackcloth and ashes and fasting and in continuous prayer and lamentations, donating all he had in his bank accounts to charity. We dont know if fruits did or didnt follow, if he was elect and repented at the end he is saved.

Until you can get any information on Hitler spending the last moment of his life in sackcloth and ashes, fasting and praying continuously, lamenting and the like, your support is baseless.

 

[Catholic Dude]

cygnusx1-

yes , God does ask the impossible , God's claims are not one jot diminished by man's inability to respond without Grace.

If a person has made himself unable to pay a fine , that has no real effect upon the requirement.

So whats you take on the parable in Matt18:23-34? The man was forgiven, but he refused to forgive, then the man was thrown in jail until the debt was paid. So was that man left in jail forever or did God pay off that debt as well?

also salvation isn't designed after what is "usual" . it is designed to proclaim how bad man is, and how Good God is.

So why should man ever smile and be happy that they are saved? They are nothings that dont deserve to live and the executioner spared them, where do they have room to be happy that they were picked over their own parents?


monergism-

I didn't say it was all right for him. It's a wicked thing to murder. And it is possible for him to not ask. It would be called apostasy, and if he were to not ask, we would know that he wasn't of the elect. What a way to go on teaching anti-nomianism. I guess that when David broke two commandments, he didn't care that he broke them. No, he was just asking for forgiveness for the heck of it. There was no true intention behind it.

Of course there was no true intention behind it, otherwise that would be wicked man's desire to correct themself which is impossible. It is God the whole way, repenting is just part of the process. Thats the privelage of being elect murder and fornication are merely pebbles in the shoe, of course Im still confused how an elect was "able" to do that outside God's divine will but thats another story.

Oh, Job was getting to the point, I'm sure.

I dont get what your saying.

The only reason person B would ask for forgiveness is because person B has God's grace. If he did not, then he wouldn't ask for forgiveness. I suppose you are correct to say that it would be impossible for person B to not ask. But I hope you don't think that Calvinists believe that it's all right for the elect to continue in sin, because we would be falling under antinomianism if this were the case. If we were to see that those who profess to be Christians, but live in sin, then we know that they aren't truly Christians. They only speak of Christianity, but they don't live it. "Just because one speaks of heaven doesn't mean he's entering it."

As I have stated before, Im not sure of the definition of "continuing in sin", how many sins exactly before we know? My conclusion as with David is that at the very least an elect is free to murder once and commit adultery once.

And as you appear to agree with what Im saying, it is impossible for B not to ask to be forgiven, making it simply a step in the sinning (and forgiving) process.

There are those who believe they are of the elect, and there are those who are of the elect. Everyone, even sinners, are commanded to repent and believe. The elect will obviously repent and believe, because God granted them to do so. It's what like Jesus said about the seeds. The first doesn't even take root, because the bird took the seed. The second rises up, but then withers away. The third sprouts up, stays up, but thorns grow around it. And the fourth rises up and makes more and more. Remember that an apostate is one who once was in a faith, but left that faith. And those who leave the faith, they truly were not Christians, as John says. Those who endure to the end, however, they are true Christians.

Thats not the definition of apostacy, thats the definition of one who is deceived. Apostacy means that you once were elect and now your not, in the case of those seeds the 3 were never elect so apostacy was never an option.

Paul was baptized: Act 9:18
Paul baptized people: 1 Corinthians 1:14-16
Others baptized people: Where?
Nobody refused a baptism: Where?

Paul was Baptized, Yes
Paul Baptized others as stated in a few passages.
Others Baptized people, all through Acts the Apostles were Baptizing.
Nobody was refused Baptism, you asked "where" thats exactly right, there is no case of someone being refused Baptism.

No, just that "A person can feel and show sings but he was really deceived the whole time." I even included myself last, saying to you that you and I could probably be a reprobate.

So you admit you could be deceived this whole time. So going back to my OP I stated that a Calvinist assumes they are elect, because if they knew they were not elect they would find another religion to join.

So, onto a question that comes to mind, do you believe that God would subject such doubt upon His Children, even to the point where they find out they were deceived the whole time? (This is one reason Im not Calvinist.) Or do you believe that there is such thing as real physical assurance?

Until you can get any information on Hitler spending the last moment of his life in sackcloth and ashes, fasting and praying continuously, lamenting and the like, your support is baseless.

Until you can get relyable information that he didnt repent your assertions are unfounded, not to mention your judging someone which is God's job.

 

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1-

So whats you take on the parable in Matt18:23-34? The man was forgiven, but he refused to forgive, then the man was thrown in jail until the debt was paid. So was that man left in jail forever or did God pay off that debt as well?

I have yet to see anyone get out of any prison in any of Jesus parables ....... so what is your point?

So why should man ever smile and be happy that they are saved?

Because salvation is impossible for man , but all things are possible with God.
And I don't want to go to hell!

They are nothings that dont deserve to live and the executioner spared them,

are you complaining about being spared?

where do they have room to be happy that they were picked over their own parents?

where do you have room to be happy when friends and family may be in hell while you may be in heaven ?......... (being picked or otherwise doesn't change the dilema)

 

[Monergism]

Of course there was no true intention behind it, otherwise that would be wicked man's desire to correct themself which is impossible. It is God the whole way, repenting is just part of the process. Thats the privelage of being elect murder and fornication are merely pebbles in the shoe, of course Im still confused how an elect was "able" to do that outside God's divine will but thats another story.

God isn't the one who does the believing for us, nor is He the one who does the repenting for us. And so now you go on to bring up antinomianism again by saying that it's a privelege for the elect to murder and commit adultery.

I dont get what your saying.

Nothing.

As I have stated before, Im not sure of the definition of "continuing in sin", how many sins exactly before we know? My conclusion as with David is that at the very least an elect is free to murder once and commit adultery once.

"Continuing in sin" is plain and simple. I don't know how you're not sure of the definition. And since now, you're saying that the elect can murder once and commit adultery once, I guess they can also lie a lot, steal a lot, and gossip a lot. You know, I'm not happy with your antinomianism.

Thats not the definition of apostacy, thats the definition of one who is deceived. Apostacy means that you once were elect and now your not, in the case of those seeds the 3 were never elect so apostacy was never an option.

It does? If so, then the elect can lose their salvation, which is untrue. An apostate is one who was once in the faith but the left the faith. Whether or not they were of the elect, they were still in the Christian faith, and thus, they committed apostasy. Shall we call it the "Great Deception" instead of the "Great Apostasy"?

Others Baptized people, all through Acts the Apostles were Baptizing.

And what about Corinth?

Nobody was refused Baptism, you asked "where" thats exactly right, there is no case of someone being refused Baptism.

That didn't answer the question. Where is it in the Bible that "Nobody was refused baptism"? Oh, wait, there is no case, thus, it's a baseless formation.

So you admit you could be deceived this whole time. So going back to my OP I stated that a Calvinist assumes they are elect, because if they knew they were not elect they would find another religion to join.

You truly do not understand. I was once an Arminianist. I hated Calvinism. I did not become a Calvinist, because I thought I was going to be of the elect. In fact, I pondered as to whether I was saved or not, and I still have that same question coming up. However, I see God's sovereignty is just and holy, and if I am sent to heaven, so be it, and if I am sent to hell, then that is the place where all men deserve to be thrown in. Why am I a Calvinist? I really can't tell you why. It just happened one day that I was told it doesn't matter if you're neither a Calvinist or Arminianist, but rather, if you're a monergist or synergist, and from that, it was as though my eyes were opened and I was revealed something unexplainable that I once knew not.

So, onto a question that comes to mind, do you believe that God would subject such doubt upon His Children, even to the point where they find out they were deceived the whole time? (This is one reason Im not Calvinist.) Or do you believe that there is such thing as real physical assurance?

God's children are His children. Those who fall away truly did not belong. The children of God will persevere to the end, but those who are self-deluded Christians, they will not.

Until you can get relyable information that he didnt repent your assertions are unfounded, not to mention your judging someone which is God's job.

Then hold your tongue, since you are judging me on all accounts of my being a Calvinist. By the way, the burden of proof is on you.

 

[Catholic Dude]

cygnusx1-

I have yet to see anyone get out of any prison in any of Jesus parables ....... so what is your point?

That man's "debt" was erased (ie sins forgiven), then he ends up in jail, are you saying he will never get out?

Because salvation is impossible for man , but all things are possible with God. And I don't want to go to hell!

Thats just it, what you do or do not want is not part of the equation. Your a passive pawn in this game. Jesus says that in hell there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, it is where the fire is not quenched, yet it is the destiny of most to end up there. As scary and disturbing as hell sounds most cant avoid it, so saying "I dont want to go to hell" is your emotions interfering with God's good plan.

are you complaining about being spared?

Im asking how someone can be happy if they had nothing to do with it.

where do you have room to be happy when friends and family may be in hell while you may be in heaven ?......... (being picked or otherwise doesn't change the dilema)

Thats the point. Its like waking up with an olympic gold medal around your neck, you had nothing to do with earning it, so why would you be happy?


monergism-

God isn't the one who does the believing for us, nor is He the one who does the repenting for us. And so now you go on to bring up antinomianism again by saying that it's a privelege for the elect to murder and commit adultery.

What do you mean He doesnt do the believing/repenting for us, its 100% Him otherwise its synergism, those acts are done automatically there is no "consenting" on our part. Im not sure of your worries on antinominanism, the term "privelage" means nothing more than a special advantage over others. Is it not a special advantage that some are forgiven and can repent while others cant? I used the term "are merely pebbles in the shoe", do you know what that means? It means in the grand scheme the grave sin is more like an annoyance instead of life changing.

"Continuing in sin" is plain and simple. I don't know how you're not sure of the definition. And since now, you're saying that the elect can murder once and commit adultery once, I guess they can also lie a lot, steal a lot, and gossip a lot. You know, I'm not happy with your antinomianism.

There is that antinomianism thing again, Im not making stuff up here. It is a Biblical fact that elect people have done those things, are they anti-N? About the "Continuing" thing, I dont see where "plain and simple" come in, look at 1Kings11:

1 Now King Solomon loved many foreign women: the daughter of Pharaoh, and Moabite, Ammonite, E'domite, Sido'nian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the LORD had said to the people of Israel, "You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods"; Solomon clung to these in love. 3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. ... 7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem. 8 And so he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods.​

Now its "plain and simple" to me that Solomon erected a few hundred Idols, is that "continuing in sin" or not? Obviously its not, because Solomon was elect. I have not heard of the term antinominanism (at least not that I remember) until you started to mention it, but Im pretty sure it isnt the same as my views/conclusions.

It does? If so, then the elect can lose their salvation, which is untrue. An apostate is one who was once in the faith but the left the faith. Whether or not they were of the elect, they were still in the Christian faith, and thus, they committed apostasy. Shall we call it the "Great Deception" instead of the "Great Apostasy"?

What do you mean "they were still in the Christian faith"? Either they were given the faith to be Christians or they werent. The definition of apostacy is someone who was once elect and now is not, Im not asking you to agree with this, thats the just the definition. Thats why I dont understand how you can beleive in apostacy, of the few calvinists I have talked to your the only one who believed in apostacy. If they only thought they were elect and never really were then the correct term is "deceived".

And what about Corinth?

What are you asking? Your original assertion:

And of those who Paul did not baptize, were these people left without the Spirit of God? Were they not regenerated?
​

was that since Paul didnt Baptize those people in 1Cor they were never Baptized. That is unfounded to make that claim, and I listed some factors against that assertion. Just because Paul didnt Baptize them does not mean that they were never Baptized. At Corinth Paul Baptized at least 5 people, and "couldnt remember if he Baptized others" (v16). As we know since Paul could not be at every church simultaneously that other people must have been doing the Baptizing.

That didn't answer the question. Where is it in the Bible that "Nobody was refused baptism"? Oh, wait, there is no case, thus, it's a baseless formation.

I only said nobody was refused because you were in error to concluded that since Paul didnt Baptize those people they were never Baptized. That is where I concluded that you were indicating that these people were somehow refused Baptism.

You truly do not understand. I was once an Arminianist. I hated Calvinism. I did not become a Calvinist, because I thought I was going to be of the elect. In fact, I pondered as to whether I was saved or not, and I still have that same question coming up. However, I see God's sovereignty is just and holy, and if I am sent to heaven, so be it, and if I am sent to hell, then that is the place where all men deserve to be thrown in. Why am I a Calvinist? I really can't tell you why. It just happened one day that I was told it doesn't matter if you're neither a Calvinist or Arminianist, but rather, if you're a monergist or synergist, and from that, it was as though my eyes were opened and I was revealed something unexplainable that I once knew not.

Is there any Scirptural passages you know of where a person is fine going to hell since that is what he deserves? Remember that prayer I listed where you should praise God even if He sent you to hell because all that mattered was His Will be done? You blew it off at first, but now your accepting it in a way.

So why did you limit your quest to Arminian vs Calvinist when there are other "options" out there? Catholic or Eastern Orthodox mean anything to you?

God's children are His children. Those who fall away truly did not belong. The children of God will persevere to the end, but those who are self-deluded Christians, they will not.

So do you believe in some sort of real physical assurance or that people just remain in a high level of doubt?

Then hold your tongue, since you are judging me on all accounts of my being a Calvinist. By the way, the burden of proof is on you.

Im not judging anyone's soul. All I have pointed out was that I dont see how some knows they are elect, deceived or non elect.

There is no burden of proof because we dont know the Hitler's heart and soul, only God does. There are no grounds for a human to conclude he was non-elect.

 

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1-


That man's "debt" was erased (ie sins forgiven), then he ends up in jail, are you saying he will never get out?

hey Dude it's a parable .......... now figure out it's spiritual meaning ........ who was Jesus talking to ? Who had benefited by God's mercies the most ?

Thats just it, what you do or do not want is not part of the equation. Your a passive pawn in this game.

I didn't realise Roman Catholics could be Hyper Calvinist ......... so what does it feel like to be nothing but a pawn in a game ?

Jesus says that in hell there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, it is where the fire is not quenched, yet it is the destiny of most to end up there. As scary and disturbing as hell sounds most cant avoid it, so saying "I dont want to go to hell" is your emotions interfering with God's good plan.

and who gave me those emotions and for what purpose , remind me........

Im asking how someone can be happy if they had nothing to do with it.

to do with what ?
I personally CONVERTED to Christ , so I don't get your point .

Thats the point. Its like waking up with an olympic gold medal around your neck, you had nothing to do with earning it, so why would you be happy?

Oh , I see your not happy when someone gives you gifts , you like to WORK for them so you can have SELF-satisfaction ........ I think I am seeing you at last.

 

[JM]

So the question is If your a Calvinist, How do YOU KNOW that you are elect?

Good question, do Calvinist (who hold to the 'P') believe they are assured salvation in the same sense as Baptist (who hold to the doctrine of OSAS) believed they're assured? Do they believe they lack 'enough' saving faith?

 

[Monergism]

What do you mean He doesnt do the believing/repenting for us, its 100% Him otherwise its synergism, those acts are done automatically there is no "consenting" on our part. Im not sure of your worries on antinominanism, the term "privelage" means nothing more than a special advantage over others. Is it not a special advantage that some are forgiven and can repent while others cant? I used the term "are merely pebbles in the shoe", do you know what that means? It means in the grand scheme the grave sin is more like an annoyance instead of life changing.

You're definitely wrong. Synergism isn't the belief that we exercise our faith.

Monergism:
-We are saved by grace alone.
-We are saved by faith alone, but our faith isn't of ourselves. It is the gift of God.
-Because God has given us faith in Him, we exercise that faith, thus, we are commanded to repent and believe.

Synergism:
-We are saved by grace.
-We are saved by faith alone, but our faith is a gift to (not from) God.
-Because we have given our faith to God, we are saved, and we are commanded to repent and believe.

Some are elect, because God has chosen them according to His good will. While the elect can ask God to forgive them, it does not mean that the elect get to go around and sin.

There is that antinomianism thing again, Im not making stuff up here. It is a Biblical fact that elect people have done those things, are they anti-N? About the "Continuing" thing, I dont see where "plain and simple" come in, look at 1Kings11:

1 Now King Solomon loved many foreign women: the daughter of Pharaoh, and Moabite, Ammonite, E'domite, Sido'nian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the LORD had said to the people of Israel, "You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods"; Solomon clung to these in love. 3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. ... 7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem. 8 And so he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods.​

Now its "plain and simple" to me that Solomon erected a few hundred Idols, is that "continuing in sin" or not? Obviously its not, because Solomon was elect. I have not heard of the term antinominanism (at least not that I remember) until you started to mention it, but Im pretty sure it isnt the same as my views/conclusions.

You believe that election only means that God chooses some to save them, or that's what I see from you. But election isn't only for the purpose of salvation. Election can also be of service, that God chose someone to do something for Him. And I don't know about you, but I don't believe Solomon entered heaven. He fell away from God. Unless of course, you can show me where it says that Solomon asked God to forgive him. And I'm surprised you have not heard what antinomianism is. Antinomianism is the teaching that one does not need to follow moral or ethic laws, and it is the opposite of legalism. Funnily, some (not all) Catholics charge Protestants of antinomianism, hence "faith alone." But really, please stop saying as if Calvinists believed that they could go on sinning. If you read the Word of God, you would know that those born of God do not keep on sinning. It's in 1 John, where this whole argument started from. Really, if you wanted to know how one knows if they are saved or not, you could have simply gone to the Scriptures instead of getting into a huge argument.

What do you mean "they were still in the Christian faith"? Either they were given the faith to be Christians or they werent. The definition of apostacy is someone who was once elect and now is not, Im not asking you to agree with this, thats the just the definition. Thats why I dont understand how you can beleive in apostacy, of the few calvinists I have talked to your the only one who believed in apostacy. If they only thought they were elect and never really were then the correct term is "deceived".

Oh, I don't know. Thank Charles Finney for his theology on Arminianism and the "feel good" thought. The Arminianist does not believe that they are given faith, but rather, they give their faith to God, and thus, they are saved. For the Arminianist, faith is man's act and precedes regeneration (Calvinists believe regeneration precedes faith). Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation. You are wrong on the definition of apostasy, because apostasy is to abandon one's faith. If the elect could abandone their faith, then they really weren't the elect. They truly did not belong to the church, and thus, they are anti-Christs (1 John 2:19).

What are you asking? Your original assertion:

And of those who Paul did not baptize, were these people left without the Spirit of God? Were they not regenerated?




​

was that since Paul didnt Baptize those people in 1Cor they were never Baptized. That is unfounded to make that claim, and I listed some factors against that assertion. Just because Paul didnt Baptize them does not mean that they were never Baptized. At Corinth Paul Baptized at least 5 people, and "couldnt remember if he Baptized others" (v16). As we know since Paul could not be at every church simultaneously that other people must have been doing the Baptizing.

It's also unfound to say that they were baptized by water, and thus, I declare that this argument here is pointless, because neither side has proof. It's all speculation. If you continue the matter, I'll just drop it.

I only said nobody was refused because you were in error to concluded that since Paul didnt Baptize those people they were never Baptized. That is where I concluded that you were indicating that these people were somehow refused Baptism.

I said they refused baptism? Was it not you who set up the premises, and thus, I did the same, and then I asked "Where"?

Is there any Scirptural passages you know of where a person is fine going to hell since that is what he deserves? Remember that prayer I listed where you should praise God even if He sent you to hell because all that mattered was His Will be done? You blew it off at first, but now your accepting it in a way.

No, I don't remember that prayer. And who is to say that I am accepting what you said in a way? Have I not always thought of this? Was it not that last time I mentioned that if I go to hell, I go to hell, and then I sent you a message to see how you were doing, that you were frustrated with my saying that I deserve to be punished in hell?

So why did you limit your quest to Arminian vs Calvinist when there are other "options" out there? Catholic or Eastern Orthodox mean anything to you?

I grew up in a Catholic church, I became a Christian at the age of 18, a Calvinist at 20. Why didn't I choose the others? Because, I don't need to, and I find Catholicism ritualistic. Besides, if God granted me to become a Catholic by John Hendryx, He would have done so. But because God has not, I am not going to be a Catholic, nor will I want to. I don't like it.

So do you believe in some sort of real physical assurance or that people just remain in a high level of doubt?

Please rephrase what you're saying, because I don't know what you mean by any of this.

Im not judging anyone's soul. All I have pointed out was that I dont see how some knows they are elect, deceived or non elect.

Read the Bible. That's where you'll get your answers. I'm just a mere man. Can I be trusted? No. But the Word of God can, for it is written: "Let God be true and every man a liar."

There is no burden of proof because we dont know the Hitler's heart and soul, only God does. There are no grounds for a human to conclude he was non-elect.

You made the call. Prove it or concede. And please, more Scripture. Christ showed that what comes from a man's heart is what makes him unclean.

 

[Catholic Dude]

(edited for size)
monergism-

You're definitely wrong. Synergism isn't the belief that we exercise our faith.

Monergism:
...

Synergism:
...

Some are elect, because God has chosen them according to His good will. While the elect can ask God to forgive them, it does not mean that the elect get to go around and sin.

Is the elect "asking" God to forgive them or is God making them ask? Also Im still stuck on how the elect can sin at all, these two things boggle my mind.

You believe that election only means that God chooses some to save them, or that's what I see from you. But election isn't only for the purpose of salvation. ...

I dont follow, I am under the impression that if your elect your saved case closed. If you elect, your not only saved, but you may also be used for something special. Is this what you saying?

And I don't know about you, but I don't believe Solomon entered heaven. He fell away from God. Unless of course, you can show me where it says that Solomon asked God to forgive him.

I have never heard this before, Im not sure any Calvinist would agree with you that Solomon was not elect. Solomon wrote 3 books of Scripture, Proverbs, Ecclesiasties, Song of Songs, AND he was in charge of building the TEMPLE!! is that not the sign of an elect? I dont know if any passages where Solomon asks for forgiveness but that doesnt mean he didnt. In Matt12 Jesus says "42 The queen of the South will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here." I think if Solomon was hellbound Jesus would not have put him in such a favorable light.
David said in 1Chr28:

9 "And you, Solomon my son, know the God of your father, and serve him with a whole heart and with a willing mind; for the LORD searches all hearts, and understands every plan and thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will cast you off for ever. 10 Take heed now, for the LORD has chosen you to build a house for the sanctuary; be strong, and do it." 11 Then David gave Solomon his son the plan of the vestibule of the temple, and of its houses, its treasuries, its upper rooms, and its inner chambers, and of the room for the mercy seat; 12 and the plan of all that he had in mind for the courts of the house of the LORD
​

And I'm surprised you have not heard what antinomianism is. Antinomianism is the teaching that one does not need to follow moral or ethic laws, and it is the opposite of legalism. Funnily, some (not all) Catholics charge Protestants of antinomianism, hence "faith alone." But really, please stop saying as if Calvinists believed that they could go on sinning. If you read the Word of God, you would know that those born of God do not keep on sinning. It's in 1 John, where this whole argument started from. ...

I did go to Scripture, with David and now Solomon, (im sure there are many other examples of people like them in the Bible). And sofar in both cases they didnt follow the rules, infact did horrible things. Im still not convinced that 1Jn makes any reference to "continuing to sin" vs "cant sin", I could have missed something, but thats not what it says in places like 3:9, thats reading into the passage something that it doesnt say.

Oh, I don't know. Thank Charles Finney for his theology on Arminianism and the "feel good" thought. The Arminianist does not believe that they are given faith, but rather, they give their faith to God, and thus, they are saved. For the Arminianist, faith is man's act and precedes regeneration (Calvinists believe regeneration precedes faith). Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation. You are wrong on the definition of apostasy, because apostasy is to abandon one's faith. If the elect could abandone their faith, then they really weren't the elect. ...

I dont understand how regeneration precedes faith, what is the need for faith? Also, when you say "Faith is mans gift to God, it is man's contribution to salvation" is that what A's or C's believed?

I still dont agree with your definition of apostacy, give me an online dictionary definition. If a man swears an oath to join a club and later breaks it then he is guilty of apostasy, according to you the only people who can apostasize (ie brake the oath) are people who never swore to begin with. See a problem with this?

It's also unfound to say that they were baptized by water, and thus, I declare that this argument here is pointless, because neither side has proof. It's all speculation. If you continue the matter, I'll just drop it.

1st Peter3:

18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
​

Acts8:

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.
​

Acts10:

44 While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 "Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.
​

Acts16:

27 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, "Do not harm yourself, for we are all here." 29 And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, 30 and brought them out and said, "Men, what must I do to be saved?" 31 And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all that were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family. 34 Then he brought them up into his house, and set food before them; and he rejoiced with all his household that he had believed in God.​

No, I don't remember that prayer. And who is to say that I am accepting what you said in a way? Have I not always thought of this? Was it not that last time I mentioned that if I go to hell, I go to hell, and then I sent you a message to see how you were doing, that you were frustrated with my saying that I deserve to be punished in hell?

I found the post where I asked you that prayer.
Here is what I said:

So I would expect in your prayers that you include the clause:
"Oh, Good and Merciful God, If I be sent to Heaven then thy will be done. Oh Mighty and Just God, If I be sent to Hell then thy will be done."
You should be just as "happy" and confident in God's Goodness if you were sent to Heaven or Hell. But I dont know of such passages where a person stands tall and proud that their Lord justly sent them to Hell, no, rather I see "weeping" and "gnashing of teeth".
​

Here is your reply:

No, my prayers are more like, "I thank You God, for this day that you have made! I praise You, for You are holy and just! But You are love as well!" And with a contrite heart, "O God, please be patient with me, a sinner! Please have mercy on me, O Lord! For it is written, God is 'slow to anger, quick to forgive! He is a compassionate God!'" And, "I thank you Lord, that by your precious blood and your broken body upon the cross, you took my place, so that I may have eternal life!" But, my personal relationship with God is none of your concern.
​

Here were your most recent comments:

In fact, I pondered as to whether I was saved or not, and I still have that same question coming up. However, I see God's sovereignty is just and holy, and if I am sent to heaven, so be it, and if I am sent to hell, then that is the place where all men deserve to be thrown in.
​

Again, is there any passages in the Bible where a person takes on the view that they are fine with what God decides to do to them be it sending them to Heaven or hell?

Im not sure what your getting at in the PM you sent, I dont recall saying you deserve to be punished in hell.

I grew up in a Catholic church, I became a Christian at the age of 18, a Calvinist at 20. Why didn't I choose the others? Because, I don't need to, and I find Catholicism ritualistic. Besides, if God granted me to become a Catholic by John Hendryx, He would have done so. But because God has not, I am not going to be a Catholic, nor will I want to. I don't like it.

So how did you not become a Christian if you grew up in the CC? Better yet, how did you become a Christian if you werent Calvinist yet?
Im not sure what you find too ritualistic or who John Hendryx is, but there is a quote by Archbishop Fulton Sheen:

‘There’s not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they mistakenly think the Catholic Church teaches.’
​

Please rephrase what you're saying, because I don't know what you mean by any of this.

Do you believe that Jesus intended for there to be some sort of visible assurance of you salvation, or do you think he intended for people to live out their life in a high level of doubt?

Read the Bible. That's where you'll get your answers. I'm just a mere man. Can I be trusted? No. But the Word of God can, for it is written: "Let God be true and every man a liar."

The Bible is a hard book for anyman to just crack open and find all the answers. I know you a mere man just like me, and we both can be trusted to a reasonable degree, I have said this before man is a rational being and God made them that way.

About every man being a liar, God chose men to do His work, the very task of assembling the Bible into the 73 books collection we have today was done by men, do you consider them liars? I trust they did the right thing and they were guided by the Holy Spirit.

You made the call. Prove it or concede. And please, more Scripture. Christ showed that what comes from a man's heart is what makes him unclean.

If he was elect then all of these passages apply (these are just a few):
Psalm25:

11 For thy name's sake, O LORD, pardon my guilt, for it is great. 12 Who is the man that fears the LORD? Him will he instruct in the way that he should choose. 13 He himself shall abide in prosperity, and his children shall possess the land. 14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him, and he makes known to them his covenant. 15 My eyes are ever toward the LORD, for he will pluck my feet out of the net. 16 Turn thou to me, and be gracious to me; for I am lonely and afflicted. 17 Relieve the troubles of my heart, and bring me out of my distresses. 18 Consider my affliction and my trouble, and forgive all my sins.
​

Prov10:

12 Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses.
​

Isaiah1:

18 "Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.
​

Ezekiel18:

21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all his sins which he has committed and keeps all my statutes and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; for the righteousness which he has done he shall live. 23 Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, says the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?
​

Matt12:

31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
​

Acts8:

22 Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you.
​

1Jn1:

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

 

[Catholic Dude]

cygnusx1-

hey Dude it's a parable .......... now figure out it's spiritual meaning ........ who was Jesus talking to? Who had benefited by God's mercies the most ?

Who was Jesus talking to: Anyone who is forgiven by God?
Who had benefitted the most: The first servant..ie the person forgiven by God?

I dont know what you want me to say here.

I didn't realise Roman Catholics could be Hyper Calvinist ......... so what does it feel like to be nothing but a pawn in a game ?

I was sure it was in this thread, but anyway a Calvinists on these forums told me that we are mere cars and God is the driver.

and who gave me those emotions and for what purpose , remind me........

This is what is killing me, your fate is sealed, reminding you doenst mean anything on the grand scale. You cant change your fate.

to do with what ?
I personally CONVERTED to Christ , so I don't get your point .

What do you mean by "personally" did you do this outside the Will of God?

Oh , I see your not happy when someone gives you gifts , you like to WORK for them so you can have SELF-satisfaction ........ I think I am seeing you at last.

Im not sure thats a fair comparison, whenever someone gives me a gift it is always conditional to some sort or merit, eg Im their friend. With election there is zero room for merits. There is no comparison between the two gifts.

 

[Quickened]

I am Monergism under a different account at the moment.

(edited for size)
monergism-

Is the elect "asking" God to forgive them or is God making them ask? Also Im still stuck on how the elect can sin at all, these two things boggle my mind.

I am not in a part of Calvinism, that I could give you a better answer. But my only answer is that the elect ask God to forgive them. God isn't the one making them do so. My previous statement, I disregard.

I dont follow, I am under the impression that if your elect your saved case closed. If you elect, your not only saved, but you may also be used for something special. Is this what you saying?

Some are for service, others for salvation. Some could be made for both salvation and service.

I have never heard this before, Im not sure any Calvinist would agree with you that Solomon was not elect. Solomon wrote 3 books of Scripture, Proverbs, Ecclesiasties, Song of Songs, AND he was in charge of building the TEMPLE!! is that not the sign of an elect? I dont know if any passages where Solomon asks for forgiveness but that doesnt mean he didnt. In Matt12 Jesus says "42 The queen of the South will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here." I think if Solomon was hellbound Jesus would not have put him in such a favorable light.




David said in 1Chr28:

9 "And you, Solomon my son, know the God of your father, and serve him with a whole heart and with a willing mind; for the LORD searches all hearts, and understands every plan and thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will cast you off for ever. 10 Take heed now, for the LORD has chosen you to build a house for the sanctuary; be strong, and do it." 11 Then David gave Solomon his son the plan of the vestibule of the temple, and of its houses, its treasuries, its upper rooms, and its inner chambers, and of the room for the mercy seat; 12 and the plan of all that he had in mind for the courts of the house of the LORD




​

I did go to Scripture, with David and now Solomon, (im sure there are many other examples of people like them in the Bible). And sofar in both cases they didnt follow the rules, infact did horrible things. Im still not convinced that 1Jn makes any reference to "continuing to sin" vs "cant sin", I could have missed something, but thats not what it says in places like 3:9, thats reading into the passage something that it doesnt say.

You win on the argument of King Solomon. But then again, I suppose all persons of the Bible are of the elect. And there is a difference between "continuing to sin" vs. "can't sin." To continue to sin is to sin willfully, but to be unable to sin, or "can't sin," that would mean the person is sinless. While we are all sinners, those who are born of God do not continue to sin, that is, to sin willfully.

I dont understand how regeneration precedes faith, what is the need for faith? Also, when you say "Faith is mans gift to God, it is man's contribution to salvation" is that what A's or C's believed?

What's the need for faith? It is written that it is impossible to please God if one does not have faith (Hebrews 11:6). Also, where I put up that faith is mans gift to God, I do not believe in that. That's Arminianistic. The Calvinist believes that faith is a gift from God. The Arminianist believes that faith is a gift to God.

I still dont agree with your definition of apostacy, give me an online dictionary definition. If a man swears an oath to join a club and later breaks it then he is guilty of apostasy, according to you the only people who can apostasize (ie brake the oath) are people who never swore to begin with. See a problem with this?

apostasy n. pl. apostasies Abandonment of one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.

apostasy n 1: the state of having rejected your religious beliefs or your political party or a cause (often in favor of opposing beliefs or causes) [syn renunciation, defection] 2: the act of abandoning a party or cause [syn: tergiversation]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=apostasy

1st Peter3:

18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ




​

Acts8:

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.




​

Acts10:

44 While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 "Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.




​

Acts16:

27 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, "Do not harm yourself, for we are all here." 29 And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, 30 and brought them out and said, "Men, what must I do to be saved?" 31 And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all that were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family. 34 Then he brought them up into his house, and set food before them; and he rejoiced with all his household that he had believed in God.​

​

And of those verses, where are the ones in Corinth?

continued...

 

[Quickened]

continued...

I found the post where I asked you that prayer.





Here is what I said:

So I would expect in your prayers that you include the clause:




"Oh, Good and Merciful God, If I be sent to Heaven then thy will be done. Oh Mighty and Just God, If I be sent to Hell then thy will be done."
You should be just as "happy" and confident in God's Goodness if you were sent to Heaven or Hell. But I dont know of such passages where a person stands tall and proud that their Lord justly sent them to Hell, no, rather I see "weeping" and "gnashing of teeth".




​

Here is your reply:

No, my prayers are more like, "I thank You God, for this day that you have made! I praise You, for You are holy and just! But You are love as well!" And with a contrite heart, "O God, please be patient with me, a sinner! Please have mercy on me, O Lord! For it is written, God is 'slow to anger, quick to forgive! He is a compassionate God!'" And, "I thank you Lord, that by your precious blood and your broken body upon the cross, you took my place, so that I may have eternal life!" But, my personal relationship with God is none of your concern.








​

Here were your most recent comments:

In fact, I pondered as to whether I was saved or not, and I still have that same question coming up. However, I see God's sovereignty is just and holy, and if I am sent to heaven, so be it, and if I am sent to hell, then that is the place where all men deserve to be thrown in.








​

Again, is there any passages in the Bible where a person takes on the view that they are fine with what God decides to do to them be it sending them to Heaven or hell?

There are no passages that I know of where any many says that they are fine where God sets them, whether it be in heaven or hell. But, I'm not a man who wrote the inspired Word of God either.

Im not sure what your getting at in the PM you sent, I dont recall saying you deserve to be punished in hell.

I wonder if that's how it went now.

So how did you not become a Christian if you grew up in the CC? Better yet, how did you become a Christian if you werent Calvinist yet?

How did I not become a Christian if I grew up in the Catholic Church? Even unbelievers can enter a church, at the time, I didn't like going to church. I only went, because my parents made me.

How did I become a Christian if I wasn't a Calvinist yet? I don't believe that Arminianists are not Christians. In fact, if I believed that Calvinists were only Christians, and all others were not (though I may see error in other teachings), then I would be supporting a hyper-Calvinistic teaching. I would be a neo-Gnostic Calvinist. Hyper-Calvinists believe that only Calvinists are Christians. But how did I become a Christian, by the grace of God.

Im not sure what you find too ritualistic or who John Hendryx is, but there is a quote by Archbishop Fulton Sheen:

‘There’s not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they mistakenly think the Catholic Church teaches.’​

​

That's a good quote, but what of those who have different experiences? And John Hendryx is a five-point Calvinist.

Do you believe that Jesus intended for there to be some sort of visible assurance of you salvation, or do you think he intended for people to live out their life in a high level of doubt?

I am still having trouble interpreting what you mean. But I'll try to answer. By visible assurance, I take the thought that you are asking if Christians, by their fruit, know that they are saved. I do think there are some Christians, mainly Paul (though I don't know where the verses are at) was sure of their salvation. And again, John was confident that the people he spoke to (in 1 John) were saved, and he encouraged them to live out their faith. I believe Jesus intended that there was to be some sort of visible assurance. It would be terrible to be left in the dark. And by this, I am presenting those letters to you, so that you know how one is sure if he is saved or not.

The Bible is a hard book for anyman to just crack open and find all the answers. I know you a mere man just like me, and we both can be trusted to a reasonable degree, I have said this before man is a rational being and God made them that way.

You are correct, and man is a rational being. As it is written: "Come, let us reason together" (Isaiah 1:18).

About every man being a liar, God chose men to do His work, the very task of assembling the Bible into the 73 books collection we have today was done by men, do you consider them liars? I trust they did the right thing and they were guided by the Holy Spirit.

The Word of God says, "Let God be true and every man a liar" (Romans 3:4). It was nothing new that I brought up. To deny it is to deny what the Word of God says. But, shall we exempt that those who wrote the inspired Word of God were not sinners? All men are sinners, even those who wrote the Bible. But I do not believe that these men who wrote the Bible were liars (even though it takes one lie to be called a liar), in the sense that they refused to lie. They were guided by the Holy Spirit, for "All Scripture is God-breathed..." (2 Timothy 3:16).

If he was elect then all of these passages apply (these are just a few):








Psalm25:

11 For thy name's sake, O LORD, pardon my guilt, for it is great. 12 Who is the man that fears the LORD? Him will he instruct in the way that he should choose. 13 He himself shall abide in prosperity, and his children shall possess the land. 14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him, and he makes known to them his covenant. 15 My eyes are ever toward the LORD, for he will pluck my feet out of the net. 16 Turn thou to me, and be gracious to me; for I am lonely and afflicted. 17 Relieve the troubles of my heart, and bring me out of my distresses. 18 Consider my affliction and my trouble, and forgive all my sins.








​

Prov10:

12 Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses.








​

Isaiah1:

18 "Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.








​

Ezekiel18:

21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all his sins which he has committed and keeps all my statutes and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; for the righteousness which he has done he shall live. 23 Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, says the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?








​

Matt12:

31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.








​

Acts8:

22 Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you.








​

1Jn1:

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

All these passages are wonderful. The truly repentant man, the one who was bestowed with grace would confess, repent, desire God, have a contrite heart, wish to be washed by the blood of Jesus, and to be cleansed of all their sins.

 

[Catholic Dude]

What? Im sorry, but I dont believe that Quickened is the same person as Monergism, Im going to wait till I see him post.

 

[Monergism]

Quickened: to be regenerated, made new, begotten, born from above.

I am Quickened.

 

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1-

Who was Jesus talking to: Anyone who is forgiven by God?
Who had benefitted the most: The first servant..ie the person forgiven by God?

The answer is The Jews ........ they were given so many gifts , so many "graces" that they were clearly going to be held to a higher degree of accountability than all men.
However , seeing as national Israel are so many times guilty of killing the Prophets , not forgetting more than one attempt at killing Jesus , it is plain that they would suffer for their sin ......... eternally!
The remnant of the Jews that are saved , are saved by the same sublime power that saves Gentiles : GRACE!
The graces that had been granted to them were conditional , they were a build up to the revelation of Jesus Christ , God incaranate .
But were these graces guaranteed to make these men Lovers of God and men ?
Did these Jews act gracefully to each other and to Jesus ? NO!

I was sure it was in this thread, but anyway a Calvinists on these forums told me that we are mere cars and God is the driver.

well anything is possible ........... but I haven't said that , so it really cannot be asked of me.

This is what is killing me, your fate is sealed, reminding you doenst mean anything on the grand scale. You cant change your fate.

Predestination is NOT fate dude ......... just look at Divine condescension ........ say .........God letting the "cat out of the bag" about the impending doom of Sodom!

What do you mean by "personally" did you do this outside the Will of God?

well , you seem to have this image of Calvinists , so I said me personally , I converted to Christ ......... conversion is something man does , Regeneration is something God does. (Regeneration is first)

Im not sure thats a fair comparison, whenever someone gives me a gift it is always conditional to some sort or merit, eg Im their friend. With election there is zero room for merits. There is no comparison between the two gifts.

not at all , Abraham is called "the friend of God" and you surely remember Jesus said "greater love hath no man than this , that a man should lay down his life for his friend"

 

[cygnusx1]

How does a Calvinist KNOW they are elect?


Easy , the ask another Calvinist!

 

[Catholic Dude]

Monergism-

Some are for service, others for salvation. Some could be made for both salvation and service.

Whats an example of "service"? Is it good or bad deeds they do?

You win on the argument of King Solomon. But then again, I suppose all persons of the Bible are of the elect. And there is a difference between "continuing to sin" vs. "can't sin." To continue to sin is to sin willfully, but to be unable to sin, or "can't sin," that would mean the person is sinless. While we are all sinners, those who are born of God do not continue to sin, that is, to sin willfully.

So you would agree that outward works dont really mean anything to us, and even if we saw or did those things ourself we could still be elect. About "willfully sinnning" are you saying that God does the other sins for us? There is no amount of sins an elect can do to make their election void.

Im not sure everyone mentioned was elect, Acts Ch4-5:

31 And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness. 32 Now the company of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had everything in common.33 And with great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. 34 There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of what was sold 35 and laid it at the apostles' feet; and distribution was made to each as any had need. 36 Thus Joseph who was surnamed by the apostles Barnabas (which means, Son of encouragement), a Levite, a native of Cyprus, 37 sold a field which belonged to him, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet. (Ch5) 1 But a man named Anani'as with his wife Sapphi'ra sold a piece of property, 2 and with his wife's knowledge he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles' feet. 3 But Peter said, "Anani'as, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? 4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." 5 When Anani'as heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear came upon all who heard of it.​

Now the question is why did he sell that stuff in the first place unless he thought he was elect? Was it not a good deed selling the things and giving at least some of it to the apostles? Well as we see the man was under the control of satan and all the while he thought he was doing good, he was tricked, God had predestened him to hell.

What's the need for faith? It is written that it is impossible to please God if one does not have faith (Hebrews 11:6). Also, where I put up that faith is mans gift to God, I do not believe in that. That's Arminianistic. The Calvinist believes that faith is a gift from God. The Arminianist believes that faith is a gift to God.

I agree its impossbile without faith, but how can regeneration come first? Unless it doesnt matter what order it comes. Why couldnt God give the gift of faith before regeneation? The way I see it faith opens the door to regeneration and they you go through that door to a new life. The way I see you describing it you find yourself in that room and then you have faith, but I dont see why.

apostasy n. pl. apostasies Abandonment of one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.

apostasy n 1: the state of having rejected your religious beliefs or your political party or a cause (often in favor of opposing beliefs or causes) [syn renunciation, defection] 2: the act of abandoning a party or cause [syn: tergiversation]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=apostasy

Yes, and you cant abandon a faith you never had. Faith is God's gift, that means if he didnt give you that gift you cant abandon it.

And of those verses, where are the ones in Corinth?

You said its unfounded to conclude they were Baptized in water, well I dont know of any passages where Baptism is not done in water. And as I said before, it nowhere says they were not Baptized, but if you look at even the order of events in Pauls life you will see he was Baptized first before he went out to preach.

There are no passages that I know of where any many says that they are fine where God sets them, whether it be in heaven or hell. But, I'm not a man who wrote the inspired Word of God either.

Thats right there are no passages, so to believe in your heart that you will obey God even if He decides to send you to hell is unBiblical.

However, I see God's sovereignty is just and holy, and if I am sent to heaven, so be it, and if I am sent to hell, then that is the place where all men deserve to be thrown in
​

That is not the attitude anyone in the NT displays. Hell is depicted as where evil doers go and Jesus makes sure all who hear about it are scared and try to avoid it, yet why be scared if a person is preselected to be sent there?

How did I become a Christian if I wasn't a Calvinist yet? I don't believe that Arminianists are not Christians. In fact, if I believed that Calvinists were only Christians, and all others were not (though I may see error in other teachings), then I would be supporting a hyper-Calvinistic teaching. I would be a neo-Gnostic Calvinist. Hyper-Calvinists believe that only Calvinists are Christians. But how did I become a Christian, by the grace of God.

I dont remembe if I already asked this, but if one becomes a Christian does that also mean they are elect? Or does God give the grace for a person to be a nonelect Christian?

That's a good quote, but what of those who have different experiences?

What are you saying you have had a different experience? The ratio he listed was 100 to millions, are you sure your you fall into such a small percentage?

I am still having trouble interpreting what you mean. But I'll try to answer. By visible assurance, I take the thought that you are asking if Christians, by their fruit, know that they are saved. I do think there are some Christians, mainly Paul (though I don't know where the verses are at) was sure of their salvation. And again, John was confident that the people he spoke to (in 1 John) were saved, and he encouraged them to live out their faith. I believe Jesus intended that there was to be some sort of visible assurance. It would be terrible to be left in the dark. And by this, I am presenting those letters to you, so that you know how one is sure if he is saved or not.

As we have already established fruit doesnt always mean what we think, in the case of Paul he started off torturing Christians and even had a few murdered, but later he had a private revelation and was converted. The same could be with hitler, he could have had a private revelation at the end or even been elect the whole time. I do know that Paul speaks to people as if they are elect, but in other places he yells at them and condemns their actions, and for some reason he warns them. Even in 1 John the very last verse of the whole book says "my Children stay away from idols", is that how you end a book if your sure the people you are talking to are elect?

You are correct, and man is a rational being. As it is written: "Come, let us reason together" (Isaiah 1:18).

So do you believe God would make us so uncertain of our salvation, yet expect us to praise Him day and night? As a rational being, I dont like calvinism for the very reason that I cant know if Im elect, I try to pray, read the Bible, do good to others, but the very fact that in calvinism it could turn out I was tricked the whole time makes me wonder if its really correct Gospel.

The Word of God says, "Let God be true and every man a liar" (Romans 3:4). It was nothing new that I brought up. To deny it is to deny what the Word of God says. But, shall we exempt that those who wrote the inspired Word of God were not sinners? All men are sinners, even those who wrote the Bible. But I do not believe that these men who wrote the Bible were liars (even though it takes one lie to be called a liar), in the sense that they refused to lie. They were guided by the Holy Spirit, for "All Scripture is God-breathed..." (2 Timothy 3:16).

Still what about those who gathered up the 27 books, they had to have been guided by the Holy Spirit. Also I dont know what your trying to prove wit Rm3:4, I agree it takes one lie to be a liar, but that doesnt mean people lie with every word they say the rest of their life. Are you lying when you say your a monergist? Im not convinced that passage is being interpreted properly, because as we see with the writers of Scripture they were telling the truth

All these passages are wonderful. The truly repentant man, the one who was bestowed with grace would confess, repent, desire God, have a contrite heart, wish to be washed by the blood of Jesus, and to be cleansed of all their sins.

.

So you cant judge hitler nor can you assume he was not elect.