How, then, is the Calvinist refuted? (2)

[Thekla]

well put bro , Ben is doing the usual straw man , if it were true as he puts it here





then how could James speak of none salvivic faith , and how could false brethren apostacize ?

could the term "apostasy" be used if they did not believe in the first place ?

 

[cygnusx1]

could the term "apostasy" be used if they did not believe in the first place ?

no !

believing for a season is possible , tempory faith is possible Lk 8:13 , the devils believe and tremble.

Apostacy is when a person has obtained certain things from the Gospel , even a position of office in the Church (JUDAS) but who's hearts are unchanged and not "sealed by the Holy spirit" against loss .

remember Christ spoke of keeping all His disciples except one , Judas.

here we might expect only that Christ would say I kept 11 but the other disciple lost himself or lost his own salvation , instead Christ Himself says he lost him , Judas , to fulfil scripture .... how do we know that Judas was a reprobate ? because of his actions and because Christ called him a "devil" .

 

[Thekla]

no !

believing for a season is possible , tempory faith is possible Lk 8:13 , the devils believe and tremble.

Apostacy is when a person has obtained certain things from the Gospel , even a position of office in the Church (JUDAS) but who's hearts are unchanged and not "sealed by the Holy spirit" against loss .

remember Christ spoke of keeping all His disciples except one , Judas.

here we might expect only that Christ would say I kept 11 but the other disciple lost himself or lost his own salvation , instead Christ Himself says he lost him , Judas , to fulfil scripture .... how do we know that Judas was a reprobate ? because of his actions and because Christ called him a "devil" .

although Paul seems to say frequently that belief must be "kept", and that we must persevere to the end. In this light, apostacy is not unlike blasphemy, or at least heresy. Apostacy, IIRC, was originally a military term - applied to deserters. One cannot desert what one has never been.

 

[frumanchu]

Man naturally hates holiness, always flees from God; he is morally depraved and his heart is darkened.

...yet, there are those who "receive the word with JOY and BELIEVE". Luke8:13

You will say "they were not REALLY believing, because they FELL to temptation/persecution/affliction".

But --- how can "holiness-hating, morally-darkened, GOD-FLEEING man", receive the word with JOY and BELIEVE???

Of all the concepts that we disagree over, this one still baffles me the most, Ben...especially in this day where easy believism and anti-nomianism are so prevalent in our churches. It is no stretch at all to believe that people would come away thinking that identifying oneself with Jesus Christ will make their lives easier and more prosperous. Do you honestly believe that every single person who displays an emotional response to an altar call is actually saved?

Do you honestly believe that a person cannot appear to be saved without actually being saved??

There is no difference in Jesus' words, between the BEGINNING belief of those in Lk8:13, and the beginning belief of those in Lk8:15. It is how they ended that matters.

The difference --- is that the second, "received the word with an honest heart, and HELD FAST and bore fruit with perseverance".

Not that "God decided anything"....

That's an argument from silence. You're claiming that the fact a parable doesn't speak to a particular issue means it opposes that issue. That's simply not a sound argument. You are treating the analogy as an allegory without justification. I know I can't force you to accept that...all I can do is keep pointing it out. I'm surprised though that you can't see how that would undermine your argument in the eyes of anyone who understands the form and function of the parable in Scripture. No disrespect intended.

 

[cygnusx1]

although Paul seems to say frequently that belief must be "kept", and that we must persevere to the end. In this light, apostacy is not unlike blasphemy, or at least heresy. Apostacy, IIRC, was originally a military term - applied to deserters. One cannot desert what one has never been.

and neither can one be lost who is saved , Christ often said he kept safe all his flock , except that devil Judas.

Apostacy is from the faith it is not from the new nature , for that which is born of God overcomes the world .... who is keeping you this day from the fires of hell ?

 

[Thekla]

and neither can one be lost who is saved , Christ often said he kept safe all his flock , except that devil Judas.

Apostacy is from the faith it is not from the new nature , for that which is born of God overcomes the world .... who is keeping you this day from the fires of hell ?

I guess I need help understanding some 'distinctions'.

"Saved" is not accomplished - in my understanding- until the "race is finished", and the Judge has 'spoken'; ie after death.

Maybe you could describe the distinction between faith/new nature. ?

As for the fires of Hell, I'm not dead yet

 

[cygnusx1]

I guess I need help understanding some 'distinctions'.

"Saved" is not accomplished - in my understanding- until the "race is finished", and the Judge has 'spoken'; ie after death.

keep in mind that scripture speaks of salvation in three distinct tenses ;

we are saved
we are being saved
we shall be saved


Salvation as already achieved: "When the kindness of God our Saviour, and his love towards man, appeared, not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that, being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:4-7).

• Salvation as an on-going process: "To us who are being saved, (the word of the cross) is the power of God" (1 Corinthians 1:18). The original text of this passage in Greek has present-tense σῳζομένοις (being saved), not perfect-tense σεσῳσμένοις (having been saved) or past-tense (aorist-tense) σῳθεῖσιν (saved); ambiguous translations such as "us which are saved" (KJV) cover up this fact.

• Salvation as yet to be obtained: "Since, therefore, we are now justified by (Christ's) blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God" (Romans 5:9).

saved is from God's viewpoint a done deal , all the elect are saved , they have been reconciled to God and delivered from their sin , this does not mean their salvation is regardless of faith , we are also being saved by faith and if we persevere till the end we shall be saved - this may sound confusing but God sees it all as one , for time is not to the Lord as it is to us , reality is somewhat different also.

Maybe you could describe the distinction between faith/new nature. ?

sure , the new nature is a new creation within , whereby we are newly born with new desires and a living unity with Christ , before we were united only by being in Him , now we have a unity that is a communion.
Saving Faith is one of those new desires , we trust on Christ , whereas others may give ascent to the truth only with no trust at all. see James

As for the fires of Hell, I'm not dead yet

no but are you denying God preseveres you in this life and ignores you in the next , or He preserves your mortal body daily but couldn't be bothered with preserving your soul !

 

[Ben johnson]

WHAT TRANSLATION IS THAT?

For therein (gar en autwi). In the gospel (verse Romans 16) of which Paul is not ashamed. A righteousness of God (dikaiosunh qeou). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (ek pistewߠeiߠpistin), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot).

.

 

[Ben johnson]

could the term "apostasy" be used if they did not believe in the first place ?

Excellent point. This reminds me of James5:19-20. "Brethren, if any among you wander away from the truth, and another leads him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way has saved a soul from death and covered a multitude of sins."

Usually they try one of the "Five-Ways".

Five-Ways:
1. Subjects were never REALLY saved in the FIRST place.
2. Subjects didn't really FALL from salvation.
3. Two groups --- one unsaved (but professing) lurking AMONGST the saved (abrupt subject change)
4. Hypothetical, bugbear; warning but cannot happen. Fatherly advice, 100% effective means by which God KEEPS us in line.
5. Dispensation --- applied to THEM back THEN but not to us here TODAY

Almost always it's #3: "Brethren" (speaking to both saved and unsaved-professing in the audience),
"if any AMONG you" (that is, if any UNSAVED lurking amongst YOU-SAVED [changing subjects now])
"wander away from the truth" (that is, wander away from their PROFESSION, they were never ever really saved)
"And another leads him back" (that is, leads him TO salvation, not really "back")
"let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way has saved a soul from death and covered a multitude of sins." (Well duh, but this is FIRST salvation they weren't really saved before.)

Sometimes #2 is attempted, "they didn't fall completely from salvation". But the use of "thanatos" (which conveys "death, with implication of eternity in Hell), and saying "uncovered sins" (which only means "unrepented/unforgiven"), prevents that.

Sometimes #3 is tried --- IF anyone falls away, but I'm speaking like this as EFFECTIVE MEANS to prevent you from falling."


If we read James1:14-16 --- is he speaking to "unsaved beloved brethren"? Is he saying anything but "deceived to thanatos-death"?

 

[cygnusx1]

.

Originally Posted by Cygnus
WHAT TRANSLATION IS THAT?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament
For therein (gar en autwi). In the gospel (verse Romans 16) of which Paul is not ashamed. A righteousness of God (dikaiosunh qeou). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (ek pistewߠeiߠpistin), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot).


thanks for the answer ben ........ i was beginning to wonder.

 

[Ben johnson]

So "holiness-hating, morally-darkened, God-fleeing" man can turn towards God, and cooperate with the Spirit of holiness, without that his "holiness-hating, morally-darkened, God-fleeing" nature is first changed by God?

Absolutely. There is no avoiding Eph2:5-8; WHEN we were dead in sins God made us alive ...by grace through faith.

By the universal CALL to salvation, depraved man CAN believe.

Calvinism asserts that man cannot believe because man is morally depraved, that is, man is not willing to come.

That's correct; that's why Calvinists are forced to consider Lk8:13 people as "UNSAVED".

They received the word with JOY and believed --- but Calvinists assert "it was FALSE belief, they were only PROFESSING but not really saved in their HEARTS --- evidenced by their later FALLING to temptation/affliction/persecution.

Therefore Calvinists can NEVER know if they are "truly-elect", or only "falsely-believing", until AFTER they prove that they are elect, by "not falling".

That is, WHEN they DIE.

A Calvinist cannot know he is "truly elect", until the moment he dies. See the problem?

 

[cygnusx1]

Absolutely. There is no avoiding Eph2:5-8; WHEN we were dead in sins God made us alive ...by grace through faith.

By the universal CALL to salvation, depraved man CAN believe.
That's correct; that's why Calvinists are forced to consider Lk8:13 people as "UNSAVED".

They received the word with JOY and believed --- but Calvinists assert "it was FALSE belief, they were only PROFESSING but not really saved in their HEARTS --- evidenced by their later FALLING to temptation/affliction/persecution.

Therefore Calvinists can NEVER know if they are "truly-elect", or only "falsely-believing", until AFTER they prove that they are elect, by "not falling".

That is, WHEN they DIE.

A Calvinist cannot know he is "truly elect", until the moment he dies. See the problem?

do me a favour ben , cease from spreading falsehoods about your brethrens beliefs !

that's right , Calvinists also believe in assurance of salvation , ben !

 

[Ben johnson]

and neither can one be lost who is saved, Christ often said he kept safe all his flock , except that devil Judas.

In John 6:67-70 --- many of the disciples were leaving. Jesus turned to the twelve, and said:

Jesus: "YOU aren't going to leave TOO, are you?" ("me" construct, expecting answer of "no")
Peter: "Of course not; we know You're the Messiah."
Jesus: "Did I not choose all twelve of you, and one is a devil?"

Can that conversation be understood in any way but "any one of you CAN leave, just like one of you IS leaving"?

Apostacy is from the faith it is not from the new nature, for that which is born of God overcomes the world .... who is keeping you this day from the fires of hell?

We can "apostacize from faith", but "still be saved"?

Will you please explain to me how someone can be "faithlessly saved"?

In Heb10:26, he writes: "If WE continue sinning willfuly after having received knowledge ('epignosis', full knowledge!) of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins but a terrifying expectation of judgment and fury of fire that consumes the adversaries."

Is this a Five-Way#4, "hypothetical/effective-means" (we can't REALLY continue in sins and forfeit Jesus' sacrifice, and come under firey condemnation)?

How do you understand that? (Keep in mind verse 29)...

 

[Ben johnson]

do me a favour ben , cease from spreading falsehoods about your brethren's beliefs!

that's right, Calvinists also believe in assurance of salvation, ben !

How can you believe that?

Lk8:13 speaks of those who "received the word (Gospel!) with JOY, and BELIEVED". But by their subsequent FALLING (to temptation/affliction/persecution), they proved they were not really elect.

If those people exhibitted "joyful belief", but their FALLING proved they were "not elect", then how can any Calvinist know he is "truly elect" (and will persevere until death), or only FALSELY (joyfully) believing which WILL be evidence by their FALLING at some time before they die?

I will appreciate if you would explain that to me.

 

[AndOne]

If those people exhibitted "joyful belief", but their FALLING proved they were "not elect", then how can any Calvinist know he is "truly elect" (and will persevere until death), or only FALSELY (joyfully) believing which WILL be evidence by their FALLING at some time before they die?

I will appreciate if you would explain that to me.

The same sort of question could be asked of the one holds to "responsible grace." How can anyne know they are ever going to be saved if they hold to it? "Responsibility" implies "works." In other words if you can't maintain a certain level of righteousness - then you loose your salvation. Given that all of man's righteousness is "filthy rags" in God's sight - no one under the tenet of "responsible grace" can ever really know if he is meeting God's standard.

So you have virtually the same delimna posed in the question above to the Calvinist.

 

[AndOne]

If those people exhibitted "joyful belief", but their FALLING proved they were "not elect", then how can any Calvinist know he is "truly elect" (and will persevere until death), or only FALSELY (joyfully) believing which WILL be evidence by their FALLING at some time before they die?

I will appreciate if you would explain that to me.

I would answer that no one can really know the condition of another's heart. The elect will know if he/she is his/her Lord's or not. The Lord will certainly know it.

All everyone else has to go by - is a person's fruit.

But this is a good question - and the very reason why we must consistantly look to our own hearts - and why we must constantly check the truth and sincerity of our faith.

 

[vekarppe]

Absolutely. There is no avoiding Eph2:5-8; WHEN we were dead in sins God made us alive ...by grace through faith.

Read the whole passage (2:1-10), and you will see the real picture.

 

[frumanchu]

Because unregenerated men CAN believe savingly in Jesus. Nothing in Scripture opposes that.

Uhh, plenty of Scripture opposes that. Jesus tells Nicodemus that men can't even SEE or ENTER INTO the Kingdom unless he is first regenerated, and Paul says that the will is in slavery to sin.

The point, is that first Calvinism asserts "totally depraved men cannot believe in any measure; they are committed to rebellion, they hate God."

I ask you ONCE AGAIN to provide a link to the quote where a Calvinist said that. You present it as a quote....as somebody's ACTUAL WORDS. I challenge you to either provide a link or stop misrepresenting Calvinists.

Then, in light of verses like Lk8:13, it's asserted "they CAN believe, but it's only superficial "professing"; they don't really believe SAVINGLY." This doesn't explain the "joy".

Sure it does. Happens all the time. Do you REALLY BELIEVE that everyone who has an emotional response to the Gospel is saved?

Nothing in the text indicates they didn't begin "believing savingly".

Argument from silence. It could just as easily be said that nothing in the text indicates that they DID begin with saving faith. All you are doing is reading your presumption into a parable and then justifying it with an argument from silence.

But persecution/affliction/temtation, caused them to fall.

By what rationale would you deny that perseverance is a characteristic of saving faith and not a prerequisite of it.

Heb6:7-8 is the perfect connection; the consequence is determined by their fruit. Calvinism claims the reverse --- "consequence" (blessing or curse, "good soil" or "bad soil"), determines the fruit (falling, or steadfastness).

No, Calvinists do not claim the reverse. The rain falls on both the good and the bad. The good produces fruit and is blessed...the bad produces thorns and is cursed. Calvinists have NO PROBLEM with it at all.

 

[frumanchu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cygnus
WHAT TRANSLATION IS THAT?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament
For therein (gar en autwi). In the gospel (verse Romans 16) of which Paul is not ashamed. A righteousness of God (dikaiosunh qeou). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (ek pistewߠeiߠpistin), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot).

.

IOW, NO TRANSLATION...just words from a commentator.

 

[vekarppe]

Read the whole passage (2:1-10), and you will see the real picture.

There is also excellent survey of this passage. I have uploaded it because it was too long to post.

You will find the pdf file from here, please read it.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/dqb7km