Is Calvinism a heresy?

[Xeno.of.athens]

I don’t quite know how to answer this question because I reject the premise on which it’s based, namely, that all human beings are God’s offspring.

Interesting, have you given due consideration to saint Luke's genealogy of the Lord, Jesus Christ? Specifically the part that states, "son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God. (Luke 3:38 NRSV-CE)" And Saint Paul's quote, "For "In him we live and move and have our being"; as even some of your own poets have said, "For we too are his offspring." (Acts 17:28 NRSV-CE)"

 

[bbbbbbb]

because of their behavior or because of how they were made because they were made in God 's image?
So which number would you go for to summarise His treatment of the unsaved from a predestination viewpoint. No 5 very unloving and uncaring then? You comfortable with that?
I do not think God ''sends' them to hell, btw they send themselves there by rejecting Christ. God is the post man- man does the addressing.
God just follows the deep and just rules/laws.

You end up with billions of people who have neither rejected Christ nor accepted Christ simply because they have never had the slightest inkling about the existence of a person named Jesus Christ. Where do they go after death?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Interesting, have you given due consideration to saint Luke's genealogy of the Lord, Jesus Christ? Specifically the part that states, "son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God. (Luke 3:38 NRSV-CE)" And Saint Paul's quote, "For "In him we live and move and have our being"; as even some of your own poets have said, "For we too are his offspring." (Acts 17:28 NRSV-CE)"

I agree completely with @DialecticSkeptic on this, though I don't know if he means it quite the same way I do. In the sense that I take the Greek poets to have meant it, all humans are God's offspring —and that, not only as merely effects of his causing, like the rest of creation, but as being made in his image, (though the poets may not have thought of it that specifically). But some of us are the "sons of God" that will be revealed, when we become like him upon seeing him as he is:

Romans 8: "19 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. 22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies."

1 John 3:2 "Beloved, we are now children of God, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. We know that when Christ appears, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is."

 

[bbbbbbb]

I don’t quite know how to answer this question because I reject the premise on which it’s based, namely, that all human beings are God’s offspring. However, I think I might have a workaround.

If I assume that we’re all God’s “offspring” insofar as God produced or generated all of us, then I can answer your question: “Very loving and caring.”

But if it means that we are all God’s children, then I cannot answer your question because I don’t accept the premise. I stand by my answer that God is very loving and caring to everyone, but we are not all his children.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. If one thinks that all humanity is equally God's children, then one is led to the heresy of universal salvation. The fact that salvation as given in the Bible (specifically the New Testament) is particular in nature clearly points to the fact that God does not view each person equally. The question then becomes as to the nature of particular salvation. If it depends on the human will, then it becomes a salvation which is either synergistic, as the RCC and others postulate, or Arminian in one form or another. If salvation is of the Lord (as stated by Jonah in the belly of the fish) then it is monergistic in nature, as affirmed by Augustine centuries prior to Luther.

 

[Mark Quayle]

You end up with billions of people who have neither rejected Christ nor accepted Christ simply because they have never had the slightest inkling about the existence of a person named Jesus Christ. Where do they go after death?

Romans 1. They are without excuse.

BUT, "such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come."

 

[bbbbbbb]

Romans 1. They are without excuse.

BUT, "such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come."

That puts paid to the notion that people willingly choose to go to hell by consciously rejecting Jesus Christ.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Interesting, have you given due consideration to saint Luke's genealogy of the Lord, Jesus Christ? Specifically the part that states, "son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God. (Luke 3:38 NRSV-CE)" And Saint Paul's quote, "For "In him we live and move and have our being"; as even some of your own poets have said, "For we too are his offspring." (Acts 17:28 NRSV-CE)"

Yes.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Yes.

You win the prize for brevity.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I agree completely with @DialecticSkeptic on this, though I don't know if he means it quite the same way I do. In the sense that I take the Greek poets to have meant it, all humans are God's offspring —and that, not only as merely effects of his causing, like the rest of creation, but as being made in his image, (though the poets may not have thought of it that specifically). But some of us are the "sons of God" that will be revealed, when we become like him upon seeing him as he is:

Romans 8: "19 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. 22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies."

1 John 3:2 "Beloved, we are now children of God, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. We know that when Christ appears, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is."

Well, yes. If we're all his offspring as the poet stated and as the genealogy implies, then a distinction between "children of God" and "offspring" could be made with some success, because the scriptures do speak of being children of God by faith. But to deny that human beings are God's offspring in some sense is just wrong.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Well, yes. If we're all his offspring as the poet stated and as the genealogy implies, then a distinction between "children of God" and "offspring" could be made with some success, because the scriptures do speak of being children of God by faith. But to deny that human beings are God's offspring in some sense is just wrong.

Even we Redeemed are not God's offspring in the sense that Jesus was. What's the problem? He did not deny that in some sense all humans ARE God's offspring. —At least, I don't see him as denying it in anything he said

 

[bbbbbbb]

Even we Redeemed are not God's offspring in the sense that Jesus was. What's the problem? He did not deny that in some sense all humans ARE God's offspring. —At least, I don't see him as denying it in anything he said

Nor did He necessarily affirm that concept, unless you take the parable of the Good Samaritan to include all Goyim.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Nor did He necessarily affirm that concept, unless you take the parable of the Good Samaritan to include all Goyim.

His point was rather obvious to me, I don't know why the disparaging...

 

[bbbbbbb]

His point was rather obvious to me, I don't know why the disparaging...

Not intentional disparaging on my part, but merely pointing out the simple fact that various aspects of theology that matter a great deal to later generations were never even on the radar of earlier generations. That is a probable explanation as to the various statements regarding God's relationship with His creation, specifically humans.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Even we Redeemed are not God's offspring in the sense that Jesus was. What's the problem? He did not deny that in some sense all humans ARE God's offspring. —At least, I don't see him as denying it in anything he said

No problem; keeping the record straight. It helps to keep things straight.

 

[jameslouise]

@Mark Quayle @DialecticSkeptic @QvQ I have masters degree in research methodology, I have a plausible and easily doable research question to pose,-do Christians who adhere to a reformed theology viewpoint have a higher IQ on average than those who do not?
I think the answer will be yes, what du think?
I ask you to reflect on that. Do you think God wrote the Gospel for only the intellectual to fully understand? Really? Come on?
Or does God choose the foolish things (me) to confound the wise (some of you) ! Cor 1 27

The arguments presented here are becoming transparent to me, they seem to fall into three categories
1. They evoke a God who is beyond understanding '(God is mysterious, God can do as he pleases') to explain and justify an unloving/uncaring God which is completely contrary to the Bible's description of Him
2. They describe an esoteric , vague fuzzy concept of a 'no choice choice' by using various terms or word plays, (regenerated will, determinism etc). But really it is just a concept and not reality and definitively not in the Bible.
3. An understandable misinterpretation (e.g.Rom 8:28-29) of some scripture and a deliberate ignoring or frank eisegesis of other scripture. (acts 17:28)

But the fact is that two modern day revelators Kat Kerr and Robin Bullock have both said that there is no predestination to accept Christ. Kerr describes The Holy Spirit as saying 'we choose to be chosen; . Either they are liars or you are wrong. I have prayerfully checked the scriptures to see if what they say is true and I have no doubt it is. I find no evidence to support reformed theology view but plenty for theirs.
I know you love scripture but do you also love your own 'brilliance ' at interpreting it?
I have not heard one of you say you will prayerfully seek guidance on this. nor have I heard you say you do not understand a certain passage of scripture or even accept there may be a different interpretation of it .
I have got my teeth stuck into your position and the grip is getting tighter not looser and the death roll approaches fast.

 

[jameslouise]

Why me, Lord?
There is a puzzle because some people cannot, no matter what, no matter why, simply cannot believe.
Some people cannot Not believe.
I could no more deny the truth of God than an atheist could affirm the truth of God.
Affirming a fact that I am absolutely convinced is the truth is not an act of will. I don't will myself to believe the sun comes up in the morning. It is not an intellectual or emotional argument with a maybe yes, maybe no.
Yet, there are people who do not affirm that truth, who cannot see the sun. Do they will themselves to blindness?
I didn't give myself the capacity to believe. I didn't will myself to belief. I don't claim superior intellect to prove my faith.
I didn't create the circumstances. In times and places without Bibles, what then?
IT is humility to respect the fact that it isn't lack of reason or will that lead some to reject God.
The capacity to believe is given to some and not to others.
The concept of Election is not an arrogance, a pride or superiority. It is a humble question, Why?

Not sure where to start here, Firstly, there is no scripture quoted and no scripture paraphrased as far as I can see. Its a bit more poetic then the usual and enjoyable to read as a result but that's about it. Most of it falls into my category 2 above
2. They describe an esoteric , vague fuzzy concept of a 'no choice choice' by using various terms or word plays, (regenerated will, determinism etc). But really it is just a concept and not reality and definitively not in the Bible

But also some blatant contradictions
IT is humility to respect the fact that it isn't lack of reason or will that lead some to reject God.
The capacity to believe is given to some and not to others.
The concept of Election is not an arrogance, a pride or superiority. It is a humble question, Why?

It is not humility, it is absolute smug arrogance to presume- 'well i am err 'chosen' , cos I just am, shame about you btw, because you are errr not, sorry about that, anyway at least you will get lakeside property for eternity.( i am not quoting you here but just my opinion of an extension to what you seem to be saying)
If God was indeed like this I would not ask him 'why' I would ask him, 'what are you playing at? How can you be so unfair?

 

[jameslouise]

We were in the knowledge that God has entirely, that we who respond and come to God are known (personally) to be predestined to conform

Im not too sure what you mean here? Is it that you are saying God is interacting with a prophetic projection of who we are going to be? Or that he just knows it and chooses us thus?/
I like it more literal. we actually existed then and He chose us from inside Himself-God the Father-all of us for a role and then again chose us in Christ also when we accepted Christ. A beautiful symmetry which support Jesus and the Father are one. We agreed in both cases. Acts 17:28 describes every single man who ever existed as being inside God the Father as does much other scripture See message 100

 

[jameslouise]

error

 

[jameslouise]

God makes is very clear that He hates certain people and He loves others

Give me scripture to confirm this and that he hated them from birth and hence not down to their behaviour.

We are not all off spring of God. God said some of us are the children of the Devil

Acts 17:28 would seem to specifically disagree with you as the 'we' can only. logically, be everyone

Acts 17:28 in more detail
For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring
In him-The preceding are are Paul describing God’s attributes making this ‘Him ‘ as applying to God the Father only
we live,-we have an existence and are alive. The ‘we’ meaning all mankind or the people who were in Paul’s vicinity.
and move- we move around
and have our being; we are a person, an entity and not a prophetic projection
as certain also of your own poets have said,- a time frame is set- this time frame being the time of your ‘old poets’ and this being well before Jesus’ time and so confirms the ‘in him’ cannot be referring to Jesus indwellings as it is before his time on Earth.
For we are also his offspring- why did we have this existence ? Because we were His offspring. Note the way it does not say we were created or we were made. This is . I believe , an indication that we were made form God Himself. A ‘copy and paste’ of his ‘tissue’ just as our indwellings are a ‘copy and paste’ of Jesus and The Holy Spirit’s. ‘In his image’ being satisfied in bot cases.Note the use of ‘also’ meaning Boht God the Father’s as well as the relationship wiht Jesus mentioned in verse 27.

 

[jameslouise]

I don’t quite know how to answer this question because I reject the premise on which it’s based, namely, that all human beings are God’s offspring. However, I think I might have a workaround

Yo have a problem then as Acts 17:28 can only logically mean everyone

Acts 17:28 in more detail
For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring
In him-The preceding are are Paul describing God’s attributes making this ‘Him ‘ as applying to God the Father only
we live,-we have an existence and are alive. The ‘we’ meaning all mankind or the people who were in Paul’s vicinity.
and move- we move around
and have our being; we are a person, an entity and not a prophetic projection
as certain also of your own poets have said,- a time frame is set- this time frame being the time of your ‘old poets’ and this being well before Jesus’ time and so confirms the ‘in him’ cannot be referring to Jesus indwellings as it is before his time on Earth.
For we are also his offspring- why did we have this existence ? Because we were His offspring. Note the way it does not say we were created or we were made. This is . I believe , an indication that we were made form God Himself. A ‘copy and paste’ of his ‘tissue’ just as our indwellings are a ‘copy and paste’ of Jesus and The Holy Spirit’s. ‘In his image’ being satisfied in bot cases.Note the use of ‘also’ meaning Both with God the Father’s as well as the relationship wit Jesus mentioned in verse 27.

If I assume that we’re all God’s “offspring” insofar as God produced or generated all of us, then I can answer your question: “Very loving and caring.

LOL so to not predestine someone to go to Heaven is being categorised by you as 'very caring and very loving'.

I picture a spokesman for all those in Hell saying 'yep we are all in Hell for eternity but dont worry God loves us' LOL again.