Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Or is that "inconsistent with your misunderstanding of their teachings"?I wouldn't say Calvinists aren't motivated to evangelize. History proves othervise. But I think often Calvinists act in a way that is inconsistent (you are free to disagree) with their teachings, which I BTW see as a good thing.
My favorite Calvinist is one who can laugh at himself.I'm happy I can make you laugh, we all need that.
You really think that you gain credibility via so many biased posts? If you don't detect a note of urgency in Paul, you're reading with blinders on."Urgency" is your notion. . .not Scripture's.
Assertion without Biblical demonstration is assertion without merit.You really think that you gain credibility via so many biased posts?
Example of what you mean by "urgency"?If you don't detect a note of urgency in Paul, you're reading with blinders on.
Let me try to be more specific. You (and so many others here) seem to think that natural man, though spiritually dead, though depraved, is only sort of spiritually dead, not utterly depraved. Scripture shows that even in their supposed "obedience" (which is really only compliance), they do so for their own self-centered reasons —it is not obedience, not submission of will. I have to add, even in that very act they think is submitting the will, the lost are not utterly submitting the will, as is evident later by their disobedience. (This is what the Reformed/Calvinist are referring to as total depravity —not that anyone is as bad as they could be, were God to remove his restraining hand, but that those at enmity with God are bad to the core, and unable to please God nor to submit to him.)What the verses from Paul shows here is the theory that "How can one at enmity with God truly desire God? He cannot, until God gives him new birth." is not true. Paul says that he as a man, "can" delight in the will of God, but the flesh overpowers him. It shows that man has the ability to desire good. He goes on to say:
Rom 8:2-3 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
He talks of two laws, the law of "sin and death", what He was talking about before, the inability to do good, though he willed it, and now the new law "the law of the Spirit of Life", a law that empowers him to live the way he wants to, in a way that pleases God.
When he then states:
Rom 8:6-9 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.
He is not stating he is totally depraved, he is referencing back to the struggle with the flesh. That he can not live righteously without God's Spirit enabling him. But looking back even in the warring state, he still maintains the "will to do good".
This is Paul doing EVERYTHING he can to win as many as possible:Assertion without Biblical demonstration is assertion without merit.
Example of what you mean by "urgency"?
Is Paul referring to his unregenerate state in Ro 7, or to the conflict between the flesh and the spirit in his regenerate state?Let me try to be more specific. You (and so many others here) seem to think that natural man, though spiritually dead, though depraved, is only sort of spiritually dead, not utterly depraved. Scripture shows that even in their supposed "obedience" (which is really only compliance), they do so for their own self-centered reasons —it is not obedience, not submission of will. I have to add, even in that very act they think is submitting the will, the lost are not utterly submitting the will, as is evident later by their disobedience. (This is what the Reformed/Calvinist are referring to as total depravity —not that anyone is as bad as they could be, were God to remove his restraining hand, but that those at enmity with God are bad to the core, and unable to please God nor to submit to him.)
In your construction: "Here we clearly see, the nature of the unregenerated man, he can "agree with/delight in the law of God", but has no ability to carry it out. It is this will that activates salvation.", you take this will that, as the passage says, "delights in God's law", to be not corrupt to the core, yet you admit that it is unable to carry it out. It is THAT inability that is described by Total Depravity. The delight is fleshly, and powerless, helpless. It cannot 'activate salvation'. Only God himself, the Holy Spirit, can do that.
I don't mean to be depressive or disparaging, but I have to say, your construction: "It is this will that activates salvation. By desiring God, a man is pulled away from the unregenerated nature.", does not carry the authority of Scriptural witness. It is only a construction built by eisegesis.
I see that as methodology to effectiveness.This is Paul doing EVERYTHING he can to win as many as possible:
19Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings (1 Cor 9).
Paul was charged with the tremendous task of establishing Christianity in a pagan world (not on his own, of course).Elsewhere he tells us that he labored night and day.
@zoidar is correct about the inconsistency. As Frederick Copleston put it, determinists are rarely consistent. If I can only do what I'm ordained to do, any attempt to improve my behavior, or respond to urgency, is futile.Read John Owen, The Mortification of Sin, and get back with me concerning urgency in the Calvinist/Reformed.
Let me try to be more specific. You (and so many others here) seem to think that natural man, though spiritually dead, though depraved, is only sort of spiritually dead, not utterly depraved. Scripture shows that even in their supposed "obedience" (which is really only compliance), they do so for their own self-centered reasons —it is not obedience, not submission of will. I have to add, even in that very act they think is submitting the will, the lost are not utterly submitting the will, as is evident later by their disobedience. (This is what the Reformed/Calvinist are referring to as total depravity —not that anyone is as bad as they could be, were God to remove his restraining hand, but that those at enmity with God are bad to the core, and unable to please God nor to submit to him.)What the verses from Paul shows here is the theory that "How can one at enmity with God truly desire God? He cannot, until God gives him new birth." is not true. Paul says that he as a man, "can" delight in the will of God, but the flesh overpowers him. It shows that man has the ability to desire good. He goes on to say:
Rom 8:2-3 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
He talks of two laws, the law of "sin and death", what He was talking about before, the inability to do good, though he willed it, and now the new law "the law of the Spirit of Life", a law that empowers him to live the way he wants to, in a way that pleases God.
When he then states:
Rom 8:6-9 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.
He is not stating he is totally depraved, he is referencing back to the struggle with the flesh. That he can not live righteously without God's Spirit enabling him. But looking back even in the warring state, he still maintains the "will to do good".
I wanted to mention, the narrative I hear sometimes from the Arminian, describing either theory or experience or both, where one gradually or in stages ascends to the point where they yield their will to God, does not to me sound to me to oppose the regeneration that Calvinism posits, except in the causal order the Arminian necessarily arranges it. Regeneration is necessary grace for faith and salvation, according to Scripture, not just in theory but in several statements as to the inability of man before regeneration —that seems to me plain as is, with no need to justify it— and not only that, but the regeneration is a change as radical as resurrection, yet there is no implied statement of temporal sudden-ness. Repeatedly I have found myself agreeing with the narrative I hear, sans the 'implications' drawn by the narrator, and hear myself saying, "YES! THAT is regeneration!" And when the narrator has continued with the claim that regeneration follows the submission of the will and repentance, I think, "YES! But that is not regeneration, but the finally recognized effect of being born again. It is the subjective experience of the objective fact of 'living water', etc.What the verses from Paul shows here is the theory that "How can one at enmity with God truly desire God? He cannot, until God gives him new birth." is not true. Paul says that he as a man, "can" delight in the will of God, but the flesh overpowers him. It shows that man has the ability to desire good. He goes on to say:
Rom 8:2-3 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
He talks of two laws, the law of "sin and death", what He was talking about before, the inability to do good, though he willed it, and now the new law "the law of the Spirit of Life", a law that empowers him to live the way he wants to, in a way that pleases God.
When he then states:
Rom 8:6-9 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.
He is not stating he is totally depraved, he is referencing back to the struggle with the flesh. That he can not live righteously without God's Spirit enabling him. But looking back even in the warring state, he still maintains the "will to do good".
This, spoken from the viewpoint of one who claims God changes, grows, improves... Ask @zoidar how that figures into his theology!@zoidar is correct about the inconsistency. As Frederick Copleston put it, determinists are rarely consistent. If I can only do what I'm ordained to do, any attempt to improve my behavior, or respond to urgency, is futile.
It's just like when a determinist punishes his kids for "wrongdoing". It's hard to find logical consistency there.
Determinism doesn't square well with a system of moral imperatives.
I can mention one thing I find inconsistent with John Piper. He says Calvinists can tell people Jesus died for them. How is that consistent with limited atonement? His answer is because Jesus died in another way for those that aren't elect. IMO it's not only inconsistent, it's also dishonest.Or is that "inconsistent with your misunderstanding of their teachings"?
Our authority is the NT, not man.I can mention one thing I find inconsistent with John Piper. He says Calvinists can tell people Jesus died for them. How is that consistent with limited atonement? His answer is because Jesus died in another way for those that aren't elect. IMO it's not only inconsistent, it's also dishonest.
Yes, you're right. The above is what they believe.I think I have come to understand the Calvinist view quite well from all the discussions here and also youtube. The thing is they mean when God decree the elect for salvation God includes all the evangelisation to this plan. If God didn't decree evangelisation none would be elect. But since God decrees it the elect come to salvation through evangelisation. Those who aren't of the elect won't receive the message. This is what I get from Calvinists. It's not that I agree, but I understand the logic.
Also see Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5 which is even more evil-sounding and more clear.For Calvinists who believes that God determines all things - to the unfortunate "Totally Depraved" that are not graced with "Irresistablr Grace" it is too bad, so sad., The quoted portions are their terms. Per Calvin, some are predestined from birth to eternal torment.
“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
Calvin's statement should be a red flag as it paints God as satanic (Jesus termed satan as the destoyer) - but for those under the Calvinist Stronghold, to question Calvinist doctrine is to question God.
This sounds like polemics unrelated to the theme of my post - random potshots. Is this how you debate - you deflect to another topic?This, spoken from the viewpoint of one who claims God changes, grows, improves... Ask @zoidar how that figures into his theology!
Free will is not denied.And yet, free will is throughout the OT and NT for those that wish to see it.
So in your view men can freely perform at least a subset of acts not foreordained by divine sovereignty?Free will is not denied.
It's unlimited ability is denied; i.e., it's ability to make all moral choices, as in the choice to be sinless in thought, word and deed, is denied.
Free will, Biblically, being the ability to choose what one prefers does not preclude divine sovereignty,So in your view men can freely perform at least a subset of acts not foreordained by divine sovereignty?
Deflection. That was not a direct answer to my question. Your words are just a reiteration of thinly veiled determinism.Free will, Biblically, being the ability to choose what one prefers does not preclude divine sovereignty,
it precludes only man's ability to make all moral choices.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?