How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

[Clare73]

I agree with the passages you quote. I am a biblicalst, so that affects how I interpret Scripture and explains our disagreement.
I appreciate you offering your belief, and to facilitate you and I exploring our differences (and areas of agreement) I'll offer my belief concerning the previous posts.
I believe Jesus was despised by men, who considered Him stricken by God. But Jesus was bearing our sins (He was pierced for our transgressions). God made Him (Jesus) sin for us. He

died for us, for our sins.
God laid our iniquities on Him, and it pleased Him to crush Him for our sake. He became a curse for us.
He is the "Last Adam". The first Adam was made a living soul, the Last a life giving spirit.
That said, there are no passages that say Jrsus died instead of us dying, or that He was substituted for us (other than the context of representation as the Last Adam).

I don't know how the Scriptures I presented could be any more clear.

If your assertion is true, then your sin debt, penalty--eternal death for your sin-- has not been paid,
and you are still dead in your trespasses and sin.

Like I said, we approach Scripture differently.

Which is usually the case in misunderstanding of Scripture.

I take a literal approach to what is written in the text of God's Word - especially with foundational doctrines like the Atonement.
So we can come together on many things, but this will never be one of them.

While I take a Biblical approach in the context of all Scripture.

 

[Brother-Mike]

The final, sole source of authority to which we must appeal when determining truths of the faith.

Pistols at dawn it is!

I've created a separate thread here lest everyone not be interested in the side discussion.

 

[Clare73]

Yes well we have to choose the definition that doesn’t cause conflict with other passages. If God wills/determines that Jesus will lose none then verses like John 15:2 John 15:6, Hebrews 6:4-6, and Galatians 5:4 among many others would be impossible.

No, it's not either/or, it's both/and.

Those verses must be Biblically reconciled without setting Scripture against itself

People couldn’t be severed from Christ, they couldn’t fall from grace, they couldn’t fail to abide in Christ resulting in being cast into the fire. So then the obvious definition is desire.

We don't reconcile verses by changing their words to make them compatible with our personal doctrine.
The verses must remain exactly as they are in bringing them into agreement.

 

[John Caldwell]

I don't know how the Scriptures I presented could be any more clear.

If your assertion is true, then your sin debt, penalty--eternal death for your sin-- has not been paid,
and you are still dead in your trespasses and sin.

Which is usually the case in misunderstanding of Scripture.

While I take a Biblical approach in the context of all Scripture.

The passages you quoted are very clear as recorded in the text of Scripture. I don't think they can be more clear.

What are you talking about somebody having to pay our debt for sins we committed? That is not in the Bible.

Were that true then God could not forgive sins (He would have to punish sins in order to forgive sinners). That is very close to 16th Century philosophy that justice demands crimes be punished (a focus on the crime rather than the criminal). Guess that makes since as Calvin was trained not in theology but law.

Christ died for our sins. He shared in our infirmity. He became a curse for us. Our sins were laid upon Him and by His stripes we are healed.

 

[Clare73]

That takes us to Deuteronomy 29:29, and its example in the case of Pharaoh.

I don’t understand what this passage has to do with the conversation, can you please elaborate?

In Deuteronomy 29:29, we learn that God has a secret will (not revealed), and a revealed will.

We see an example of these in Pharaoh. God's revealed will to Pharaoh was "Let my people go."
But God's secret will for Pharaoh was to harden his heart so that he would not let the people go (Exodus 4:21), all to accomplish a greater purpose (Romans 9:17).

1 Timothy 2:4 would be one of these, it being the revealed will of God to man,
while God's election of only some is according to his secret will, the knowledge of whom they are specifically not being known to us.

 

[BNR32FAN]

We don't reconcile verses by changing their words to make them compatible with our personal doctrine.

I’m not changing any words. I even posted the definitions of both Thelo and Thelema along with their references numbers so that anyone can easily look them up for themselves and the word “desire” is in both definitions. So I’ve provided strong evidence supporting my position.

 

[Clare73]

Ok so Jesus was trying to save them but they weren’t saved. We agree on that. So
what does that do to the doctrine of irresistible grace

"Irresistible" is in the sense that it is what they prefer, like ice cream.

By irresistible grace is meant God's operation in the disposition/heart of someone, giving them to prefer his will, and since they prefer it, they freely choose it. . .the corollary being, if God does not give them to prefer his will over theirs, fallen nature is such that they will not choose his will.

and how does that line up with what Jesus said in Luke 13:6-9?

Luke 13:6-9 is about a tare in among the wheat in the professing church (vineyard), a trash tree in among the fig trees in the professing church (vineyard).
God extends time for repentance (Romans 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9); i.e., fruit, which, if the tree does not bear, it will be cut down (condemned).

John 5:34, Luke 13:6-9 are about presenting the gospel to both those who have ears to hear and those who have ears which cannot hear.
If the tree produced fruit, God was working in it, and it had hears that could hear.
If it did not produce fruit, God was not working in it (it was a "tare"), it had ears that could not hear, and would be cut down.

Those in whose hearts God works are wheat, and have ears that can hear.
Those in whose hearts God does not work are tares, and have ears that cannot hear.

And tares do not become wheat, nor does wheat become tares.

 

[Clare73]

The NASB uses the word pledge in those verses. Do we need to meet any conditions to fulfill our part of the covenant?

No condition that God himself does not provide.

 

[Clare73]

Well in Colossians 1:21-23 Paul said
“And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach— if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭21‬-‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

So apparently we must remain steadfast in our faith and not turn to disbelief.
And Jesus said
“If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15‬:‭6‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬
According to this we must abide in Christ and not turn away from Him.
So I would say yes we do have to continue to meet certain requirements in order uphold our part of the covenant.

Yes. . .and all these things God works in us to will and to do (Philippians 2:13)

 

[Clare73]

You lost me here. You highlighted verse 5 but seem to be overlooking verses 3 & 4 here.
“But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭5‬:‭3‬-‭5‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

You said that verse 5 is half the answer. What do you mean by that?

Explained in post #226 where it was stated.

 

[Clare73]

I see, so how does someone fail to remain in Christ? John 15:6

How does someone who has been enlightened by the Holy Spirit fall away? Hebrews 6:4-6?

Wheat and tares look alike.
The wheat is born again, the tares are not.

The tares fail to remain in Christ, while the wheat remains.
The tares fall away, while the wheat remains.

 

[BNR32FAN]

In Deuteronomy 29:29, we learn that God has a secret will (not revealed), and a revealed will.

We see an example of these in Pharaoh. God's revealed will to Pharaoh was "Let my people go."
But God's secret will for Pharaoh was to harden his heart so that he would not let the people go (Exodus 4:21), all to accomplish a greater purpose (Romans 9:17).

1 Timothy 2:4 would be one of these, it being the revealed will of God to man,
while God's election of only some is according to his secret will, the knowledge of whom they are specifically not being known to us.

First of all God hardened Pharaoh’s heart because He knew that Pharaoh would not do as He had commanded.

“But I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except under compulsion. So I will stretch out My hand and strike Egypt with all My miracles which I shall do in the midst of it; and after that he will let you go. I will grant this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be that when you go, you will not go empty-handed. But every woman shall ask of her neighbor and the woman who lives in her house, articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and you will put them on your sons and daughters. Thus you will plunder the Egyptians.””
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭3‬:‭19‬-‭22‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Second there was no secret will in this case because God specifically told Moses why He was going to harden Pharaoh’s heart.

“But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart that I may multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭7‬:‭3‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Well how does that line up with Ezekiel 18:20?

“The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.”
‭‭Ezekiel‬ ‭18‬:‭20‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Paul doesn’t say that we are guilty of Adam’s sin in Romans 5 nor does he say that we are condemned by Adam’s sin. Paul specifically stated that death spread to all men because all sinned, not because Adam’s sin was imputed upon us. That would be a direct contradiction of Ezekiel 18:20. Thru Adam’s sin the result was condemnation for all because we inherited his sinful nature and committed our own sins. So I have to disagree with her interpretation on this one because it adds to what Paul actually stated. Paul never said that Adam’s sin was imputed upon us nor does he say that the guilt of his sin imputed upon us. He said that the condemnation of all resulted from Adam’s sin. That result was because we all sinned ourselves as a result of inheriting Adam’s sinful nature. The imputation of Adam’s sin, the guilt of Adam’s sin, or the punishment of Adam’s sin contradicts Ezekiel 18:20.

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭12‬-‭19‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Wrong rom3:23.....all sinned, at one point in time. That time was the fall.

 

[Clare73]

Of course it does, constantly instructing and exhorting us to be and remain with Him, evidenced by what we do, how we live and how we love.

Which instructions and exhorting are one of the ways God keeps the elect.
The elect respond to and obey the instructions.
The tares fail to heed them.

No-just honest truth. You've assumed that Scripture serves as the way you prefer it to.
Protestants could never covene an ecumenical council, for example. Protestants are part of the church, yes, but can the church be divided in beliefs? Protestants disagree widely and significantly all day long with each other on these forums, as well as between denominations, which often split with each other because of disagreements. Protest is the spirit of Protestantism after all, based on the bible.
Quite subjective. Anyway,

one must read and include all of Scripture.
A little input from the historic church and ECFs doesn't hurt at all either.

Nevertheless, only Scripture governs.

Wishful thinking. Scripture, itself, often provides the source of controversy, ambiguity.

That depends on the individual.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Wrong rom3:23.....all sinned, at one point in time. That time was the fall.

“for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3‬:‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

This says nothing about one point in time or the fall. All did not exist when the fall took place. Did they sin before they were even conceived?

 

[John Mullally]

When someone asks, "how can a loving God send people to hell"?
The reply I usually hear is, "people send themselves to hell by rejecting salvation from hell".

But it seems going by the Calvin view, God does indeed send people to hell. And they have absolutely no chance, choice or hope in avoiding it?

Excellent point as God desires all to be saved per 1 Timothy 2:1-6. Here Paul exhorts Timothy to the understanding that God desires all to be saved. Paul.says Satan (and blasphemously Calvinist doctrine attributes God to) works against mankind per 2 Corinthians 4:4-6. Repent it you believe that God predestines anyone to hell or is indifferent to His creation! How dare you! Jesus who commands us to love our neighors is not indifferent to our neighbors as the erramt Calvin states (trying to be charitable)!

1 Timothy 2:1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,

2 Corinthians 4:4 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,​

 

[BNR32FAN]

Wheat and tares look alike.
The wheat is born again, the tares are not.

The tares fail to remain in Christ, while the wheat remains.
The tares fall away, while the wheat remains.

Im sorry but according to the scriptures that explanation doesn’t work because no one can come to Christ unless The Father draws them and the tares are planted by the evil one not The Father. So those who fail to remain in Christ were drawn by The Father not planted by the enemy. Tares are never in Christ.

 

[Clare73]

Are you saying that God was being kind, tolerant, and patient with them hoping
that this would bring them to repentance yet at the same time knowing they were incapable of repentance because He had not bestowed His grace upon them?

I am saying what Scripture presents.

God exercises kindness and patience, to demonstrate their hardness and rebellion, in waiting for men to repent, so that they will have neither excuse nor just claim against him for their failing to do so.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

And an excellent explanation of the nature of Christ's atonement on that cross:
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him (v.5),
the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all (v.6),
for the transgression of my people, he was stricken (v.8),
he will bear their iniquities (v.11),
he bore the sins of many (v.12).

God nailed our record of wrong doing to the cross in nailing Christ to the cross, the bearer of our iniquity.
Christ died for our sin, in our place--our substitute (Colossians 2:13-14).
Jesus was made a sin-bearer, he bore our sin, in our place--our substitute (2 Corinthians 5:21).
He became a curse for us, on our behalf, in our place--our substitute (Galatians 3:13).
Au contraire. . .
Calvin argued from the meaning of the Greek words themselves--e.g.,
justification - declaration of not guilty, sentence of acquittal of guilt - forensic;
imputation - reckoning/accounting/crediting righteous to one - forensic;
sanctification - righteousness imparted to one through the obedience of faith by the Holy Spirit which is righteousness leading to holiness (Romans 6:16, Romans 6:19) - actual.
What they believe is taught.

What is stated above couldn't be clearer. . .Christ died in our place for our sin, that we might become the righteousness of God. . .by justification (declared not guilty).
It was another exchange of imputation. . .our sin imputed to Christ on the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21)
and Christ's righteousness imputed to us (Romans 4:1-11).

Yes Claire you see clearly the scriptural teaching of both propitiation and substitution.
Beware of anyone who tries to explain away truth and suggest it was philosophy not found in scripture .

 

[BNR32FAN]

Explained in post #226 where it was stated.

No it wasn’t explained I just wanted you to expound on your point to further expose your flaw in reading that verse. Your skirting around your implication that verse 5 doesn’t apply to the saints in Ephesus.

“For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭5‬:‭5‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

But that’s ignoring verses 3 & 4.

“But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭5‬:‭3‬-‭4‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Verse 5 begins with the word “For” meaning because. Verse 5 explains why immorality must not be named among them and the consequences that will take place if immorality is named among them. I suspect that you know this and that’s why you declined to explain further.