- Aug 11, 2017
- 25,846
- 8,376
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I quoted Acts 10:34-35 what are your thoughts on that brother?
Upvote
0
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.
I believe you are not giving due consideration of the difference between being responsible for man's behavior (will) and bearing the guilt for man's behavior.
I am responsible for my children's behavior even though I did not commit their trespasses.
Do you understand that justice isn't about what's "fair"?
Look up the Latin root. It means "soup". "Too many chefs spoil the broth" is a worthy adage.
God is about perfection, not fairness.
Of COURse it's a "huge problem" that God's election to salvation is outside man's capability of attaining. That's why it took His crucifixion to fix.
Man's ability to freely choose spiritually was lost in the fall.
1 Corinthians 2:14: But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Paul also points out that the gospel is foolishness to those who ARE drowning, but it is the power of God to the saved. So you can't even make sense of the gospel until the Holy Spirit gives you faith (ears to hear).
Yes, we are powerless and totally dependant on His mercy, which is fine by me because I would screw it up for sure.
If you are proud of your decision to be saved, you might not be.
Wrong.
Calvinism allows for choice, but doesn't enshrine the will with a false authenticity just because it is able to choose wrongly.
If a fallen man is able to choose salvation, he isn't completely fallen.
So believe in God's ability to choose, not in some random fallen dude in the flesh.
Thanks. lol. I just now pulled that up to look at it.I quoted Acts 10:34-35 what are your thoughts on that brother?
It perfectly refutes the OP's assertion that if God's mercy is the only hope for an individual, God shouldn't have created people who are meant to receive His justice (that's not fair!).
But He did:
Rom.9
- [22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Thanks. lol. I just now pulled that up to look at it.
I see no conflict between that & unconditional election.
You don't have to have heard the name "Jesus" to be saved.
Psalm 19 makes it pretty clear.
"[1] The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
[2] Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
[3] There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
[4] Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,"
We all have a choice, but we all can only make a bad or "free" choice.According to the implications of total depravity and unconditional grace how does anyone have a choice?
It perfectly refutes the OP's assertion that if God's mercy is the only hope for an individual, God shouldn't have created people who are meant to receive His justice (that's not fair!).
But He did:
Rom.9
- [22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
We all have a choice, but we all can only make a bad or "free" choice.
I completely understand & completely disagree if you don't call that a choice.
A bad choice is still a choice even if it's the only one we can make.
God did not bite that apple, but He did allow that it be there.
That should clue us that there's a plan and not to judge the future on today's surface details.
I agree.That was not my assertion at all friend. My assertion was that if man is incapable of attaining grace by any means then God’s judgement is unjust. God cannot expect man to accomplish the impossible then punish him for all eternity for failing to do so. It’s preposterous.
Not exactly correct, sir.Unconditional election teaches that man cannot gain favor with God to receive grace.
I agree.
But I disagree that He expects man to accomplish it. That's why He sent His son as the only man who not only could accomplish it for Himself, but for all His own. All who His father gave Him to show His mercy.
He challenges us - or more to the point, He challenges our pride. But He doesn't expect us to do what only Jesus could.
It perfectly refutes the OP's assertion that if God's mercy is the only hope for an individual, God shouldn't have created people who are meant to receive His justice (that's not fair!).
But He did:
Calvinism teaches you cannot earn saving grace, and we are saved by grace, not by our choice (free will).
Here's the clincher. If Calvin was right about God, many today hate him with a passion and worship idols using his name.
"In every nation" is in close proximity to "not one to show partiality." The one refers to the other. He does not show partiality in regard to nations, but if anyone fears Him etc..... The whole passage is about that very matter, as it turns out. Peter only just then realized that the Gospel was not just to the Jews.In Acts 10:34-35 Peter says that God does not show partiality and that in every nation the man that fears Him and does what is right is accepted, approved, welcome to Him. He doesn’t say the man is appointed, elected, or chosen by Him.
“Opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.”
Acts 10:34-35 NASB
If unconditional election is true then God would be showing partiality towards the elect.
It might be worth noting that TULIP is not in itself the whole of Reformed Theology, and that in fact, that it is a response to the 5 points of Arminianism, and not in itself even representative of Reformed Theology. It is rather shocking to most who are not familiar with many of Reformed Theology's tenets but when the points are well explained, it is likely that they mostly fit what a true believer already believes.I’m going to try to keep the OP short and to the point and we can expound upon this in the thread. The point I want to make is how can God’s judgement be just if Calvin’s theology is true? According to Calvin’s doctrine of total depravity man is incapable of repenting and believing in God unless God elects them to salvation. Below I have provided a brief description of total depravity from Wikipedia. Now I know that this description may not fit everyone’s view of the doctrine since many people view it in different ways but these can be discussed in the thread.
Total depravity is the fallen state of human beings as a result of original sin. The doctrine of total depravity asserts that people are, as a result of the fall, not inclined or even able to love God wholly with heart, mind, and strength, but rather are inclined by nature to serve their own will and desires and reject his rule. Even religion and philanthropy are wicked to God because they originate from a selfish human desire and are not done to the glory of God. Therefore, in reformed theology. if God is to save anyone, he must predestine, call, or elect individuals to salvation since fallen man does not want to, and is indeed incapable of, choosing him.
The major complication to Calvin’s theology is the doctrine of unconditional election, which I believe fails to take Acts 10:34-35 into consideration.
n Calvinist (Reformed) theology, unconditional election is considered to be one aspect of predestination in which God chooses certain individuals to be saved. Those elected receive mercy, while those not elected, the reprobates, receive justice without condition. This unconditional election is essentially related to the rest of the TULIP doctrinal outline and hinges upon the supreme belief in the absolute sovereignty of God over the affairs of man. God unconditionally elects certain people even though they are sinful as an act of his saving grace apart from the shortcomings or will of man. Those chosen have done nothing to deserve this grace.
In Calvinist and some other churches (Waldensians, Katharoi, Anabaptists, Particular Baptists, etc.) this election has been called "unconditional" because his choice to save the elect does not depend on anything inherent in any person chosen, on any act that a person performs or on any belief that a person exercises. Indeed, according to the doctrine of total depravity (the first of the five points of Calvinism, the influence of sin has so inhibited the individual's volition that no one is willing or able to come to or follow God apart from God first regenerating the person's soul to give them the ability to love him and take part in the salvation process. Hence, God’s choice in election is and can only be based solely on God's own independent and sovereign will and [not] upon the foreseen actions of man
So according to Calvin’s theology not only is man incapable of repentance or even believing in God, he is also incapable of doing anything to attain God’s election. This presents us with a huge problem because now God’s election is completely outside of man’s capability of attaining. According to John 3:18 man is judged according to wether or not he believes in Christ, but according to Calvin’s theology man is completely incapable of believing on his own accord in any way and is also incapable of attaining God’s grace that would enable him to believe. So ultimately those who will burn in the lake of fire never had any chance for salvation. God being omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent not only foreseen this, has the ability to prevent this, but has decreed that the majority of man will be created in this fallen state and punished for all eternity of no fault of their own. Ultimately Calvin’s theology makes God responsible not only for those who will burn in the lake of fire but also responsible for them not coming to repentance since He has intentionally made them in this fallen and incapable state. With that said, how can God’s judgement and punishment be just if this was of His doing and man never had any choice in the matter?
Ultimately Calvin’s theology makes God responsible not only for those who will burn in the lake of fire but also responsible for them not coming to repentance since He has intentionally made them in this fallen and incapable state. With that said, how can God’s judgement and punishment be just if this was of His doing and man never had any choice in the matter?
"Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?" (Romans 9:21)how can God’s judgement and punishment be just if this was of His doing and man never had any choice in the matter?
Just a short note: Reformed Theology does not teach that man is unable to choose. Only that his choice is always corrupt, apart from God's work in him.No Dave, here's the clincher...
Total depravity must mean total depravity before we can understand the POWER that freed us from total depravity.
If God had to make a person a believer, than the Gospel lacks the power UNTO salvation. So basically Calvinism is a direct attack on the cross of Christ. No choice but to believe, and no choice but to burn is no choice in the cross.
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?