Is There Faith In Calvinist System?

[All Becomes New]

And then there are Calvinists who disagree with other Calvinists regarding all of its variables and nuances.

Can you name a Christian tradition where all the members of that tradition agree? I bet you can't.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Non-Calvinists believe God did the whole work of Salvation. Jesus came to the Earth, he died for our sins and was raised again for our justification. That's the work that he did. Man couldn't do any of that. Man can however choose to receive by faith what God has accomplished. He can't take credit for it any more than a drowning man who embraces a life preserver can claim or would claim he saved himself. All the credit would go to the one who threw out the preserver.

I'm sure you don't think you are contradicting yourself, but, at least to my mind, that is self-contradictory, when you say God did the whole work, but then you stop this "whole work" at a certain point where man takes over, in and of himself, apart from God's causation.

Nope, nope, nope. Sorry but just no. You are not regenerated and then you have faith. You're given faith and it leads you to regeneration.

So I used to think. Yet, you cannot, and nobody has, to even near my satisfaction, explained how the dead in sin, at enmity with God, unable to submit to God's law, unable to please God, (and that's just Romans 8; if you need more, look up a good explanation of Total Depravity (or Total Inability) with Bible references witnessing to the truth of it), is able to have faith yet still be in that state of spiritual death.

It is even reasonable, to me, to consider salvific faith concurrent with regeneration, since they are both gifts, done in us and to us by the Spirit of God, but you can't have one without the other, even though we, in our finite minds, consider them separately.

(Also, and I know most minds can't go here very well, (mine included, but I must insist on the logical truth of it anyhow), that causation is not, as we assume, necessarily dependent on time passage.)

Also notice, that every time (to my knowledge) that the Arminian assumes causal sequence from decision leading to salvation in a passage, what he is actually reading is time sequence, and sometimes not even sequence at all.

So what exactly do you think you're choosing towards? If you're saying you have the new nature before the choice, well what are you talking about then???? What does your choice produce?

Do you mean, "is the choice really valid?" The choice produces, at the very least, submission to God, which leads to, or is part and parcel of, all sorts of good.

Sorry but you Calvinists however have put the petal to the metal and taken that verse to the extreme. There's nothing to say that verse can't also basically mean someone can want free like an alcoholic but he needs an impartation from another to actually be doing right. He sees what's right but he can't overcome without others or another. In the sinners case it would be God coming within one with eternal life changing his nature.

I don't expect you mean to say that the verse does not, in some way, mean what it says. Certainly, we all intuitively desire good. Lost and Believer alike have a conscience and an urge thereunto. The Lost have a "God-shaped hole in the heart". But at the core, the Lost wants what he wants, at enmity with and contrary to God, whether he realizes it or not. But the Redeemed, while still in this temporal body, has been given a "new core".

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Thanks, SGB3

As I recall, εἰς (eis), in its root meaning, is something along the lines of "toward" or "unto"; in this context it could even have been "preached AT you" But I like "into" better!

"Into" also works well in Romans 9:9, 10 "confession made unto salvation", without implying causality.

I just finished sending @Xeno.of.athens and @Clare73 a post (#80, in the thread, Sola Fide) concerning Romans 6:16 and the difference between how translators use εἰς in, "Do you not know that when you offer yourselves as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one you obey, whether you are slaves to sin leading to death, or to obedience leading to righteousness?" In both Strong's and WH it is meant, "into", just as you said. Sola Fide

To me, it is very interesting, the different nuances of meaning and implications a translation of a proposition can make.

Good stuff. Thanks for sharing.
I did a study and wrote a little booklet on the word into EIS (into) some years ago. Found some interesting verses.

John 3:16-18
16. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18. The one believing into Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.

The topic in this passage is the new birth. I believe this is referring to being baptized into Christ.

Rom 6:
3 Or are you ignorant that all who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?
4 Therefore, we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, so also we should walk in newness of life.

Galatians 2:16 LITV
16. knowing that a man is not justified by works of Law, but that it is through faith in Jesus Christ (we also believed into Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of Law, because all flesh will not be justified by works of Law). Psa. 123:2

1 Corinthians 12:13 LITV
13. For also we all were baptized by one Spirit into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, even all were given to drink into one Spirit.

2 Corinthians 1:21 YLT
21. and He who is confirming you with us into Christ, and did anoint us, is God,

Galatians 3:26-27 KJV
26. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

John 12:46 LITV
46. I have come as a Light to the world, that everyone who believes into Me may not remain in the darkness.

Roma 3:22 (KJS)
Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto (into) all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

We are born again by believing into the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.

1Peter 1:3 (KJS)
Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.


Paul goes a little deeper in Ephesians 2.


Ephesians 2:1-10 KJV
1. And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2. Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3. Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
5. Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved ;
6. And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Wonderful passage. We were raised up together because we were in Him and God raised the Head up with all the members of the body.

Long post... sorry.

 

[John Mullally]

And I'd say again sorry but you're rejecting what Paul stated that the gospel is called the word of Faith. The gospel message is designed by it's very nature to put FAITH into the one who hears. They however must act upon the understanding the gospel message brings and with their knowing God is good and keeps his word they'll believe in their heart and confess with their mouth and it states by doing those two things it takes them UNTO ....UNTO salvation. It's not salvation you've got it, it states it takes them UNTO it. Please read Rom 10: 9,10

I agree and in the same chapter Paul says that faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17). And man can decide what he listens to.

Faith (or trust) in God is an act of the will, describing an action between two agents. If the agency of man is absorbed under Calvinist “Monergism,” then it is no longer faith or trust being displayed, but instead an action that God does to Himself through another agent. Faith and trust in God requires willing human consent, or else it’s no longer faith and trust that we are talking about.

 

[Mark Quayle]

If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Rm 10:9 NIV

NLT says "you will be saved" vs9

EST vs 9 you will be saved vs 10 on confessed and is saved." That's after the order or sequence of believing and confession.

KJV translated by many Calvinists....UNTO salvation

The Greek preposition “εἰς”​

Found more than seventeen hundred times in the New Testament, the Greek preposition “eis” meant “into,” “to,” “toward,” “unto.”

So Mark what you claim easily can mean doesn't quite easily mean what you say.

Ha! I just now just finished a post to you, mentioning that (to my knowledge) every time an Arminian quotes a passage, claiming causal sequence, that at best it only shows time sequence, and sometimes not even sequence at all. Do you mean, by, "...you will be saved" that
And do you believe that the mute cannot be saved?

As for your, "into"; or "to"; or "toward" substituted for "unto", and even "unto" itself, (I assume you were referring to vs 10 of Romans 10), they do not of themselves imply causal sequence. Even if they are taken for TIME SEQUENCE, they still do not imply causal sequence. The confession made unto salvation can begin with the confession beginning at one end with the mention of 'salvation' at the other end (and no, I'm not saying that is the case —I'm just saying it is a possible understanding; i.e. you have no proof). The most you can prove from the verse is that the confession is in keeping with the salvation. Likewise with the heart believing; there is no implication that it is an act of the will producing the belief, nor even by this verse can you prove that belief produces salvation (though it is true that it does, as salvation is through faith).

But what makes this objection particularly extraordinary, is that the Calvinist/Reformed DOES believe that faith (even belief) brings salvation! We just don't believe in the construction that man's choice (act of will) produces salvation. The Calvinist/Reformed INSIST that Salvation is by Grace through Faith!

 

[Clare73]

Thanks for the post but you're off the subject of the OP. The OP is talking in what way the Calvinist message put's faith into the hearts and minds of the hearers. It seems they're given no absolute substantial faith God is willing to save them. The Calvinist message is God could but you never know for sure.

Please substantiate this claim of Calvin.

Again I'm not talking about YOUR faith YOU have in God and his ability. I'm talking about what FAITH you're putting into the sinner by your message that God IS WILLING to receive them. The sinner knowing of Calvinism could ask you how do I know God even wants me for salvation. If you're saying he's left us in the dark about that what assurance can I ever have? P

Where do you find this message?

Scripture states God actually saves from his wrath (Ro 5:9) and condemnation (Ro 5:18) all the born again; i.e. those who believe in and trust on the person and atoning work (blood, Ro 3:25) of Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16) for the remission of their sin.

 

[Clare73]

I don't want to be resisting your statements just for the sake of resisting. I can graciously accept that you give what you call a general call to all mankind inviting all. In that you make a good point. Problem is though we do live in cultures which do understand various groups ways of thinking. There are many that know Calvinists believe God is not willing that all will be saved and some will and
even Calvinists can't tell you why God chooses one and not another. It's a great mystery to them.

For the sake of his purpose, the same reason he chose Jacob and not Esau (Ro 9:11).

What more do you need to know?

So they're left not knowing for sure or with any faith God will receive them.

From where are you taking this narrative about not knowing for sure "or with any faith" God will receive them?

It has nothing to do with the gospel. . .which is not about God "receiving" anyone.

The gospel is God saves all who believe in and trust on the person and atoning work (blood, Ro 3:25) of his Son (Jn 3:16) for the remission of their sin. Jesus purchased salvation (1 Co 6:20, 1 Co 7:23) as a right due to those who believe (Jn 1:12).

What could be more clear?

 

[Hammster]

Is there faith in the Calvinist system? A Calvinist poster stated they tell a sinner that Jesus came to save his people from their sins. I'd say that right there demonstrates they're not giving the sinner by what they say as an ambassador any real FAITH.

They're giving them HOPE but not FAITH. Jesus Christ came and saved his people from their sins. How many people? How do they know who hear this they're one of the especially blessed? They can't. All they can have is HOPE. Now hope is a wonderful biblical thing we have the hope of the return of Jesus Christ but FAITH and HOPE when it comes to salvation is different.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb 11:1

FAITH is substantial. Hope is not. Hope is a good thing but it is not faith. And to prove that 1 Cor 13: 13 states,

And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love; but the greatest of these is love. 1 Cor 13:13


Not these two but these THREE!

In order for anyone's message to have FAITH it must come across that it's substantial for all.

I'll explain it this way. A wealthy man announces to a crowd of 100 I'm able to give $1000 dollars to everyone here. How many can have (substantial) FAITH they're going to get it. NONE. Faith doesn't rest on just knowing one's ability. The will needs to be expressed what the one is willing to do. He now states, "I'm able to give 70 of you $1000 dollars." How many can have (substantial) FAITH for it? None of them. They can hope they're going to be one of lucky ones but they can't have substantial FAITH. NOW he states, "I'm able to give 100 of you $1000 dollars and I am going to do it" How many now can have substantial FAITH? ALL OF THEM! They're now in the realm of FAITH! The only thing that needs to be addressed is the wealthy man a good character and does he keep his word? Well we KNOW God does!

So there you have it....FAITH

Now a shocking things I'm going to say to Calvinists here. There really is no FAITH in the Calvinist paradigm, that is not in any real true sense of the word. Those who hear Calvinists say God came to save his people from their sins is like saying I'm able to give 70 of you 100, $1000 dollars. They can hope they'll be one of the lucky ones but FAITH? NO. Just hope and not faith.

Now Romans 10 calls the gospel the Word of Faith! Get this and don't let go of it. That therefore means salvation must be for ALL in the same way it's only a message of FAITH is the one says I'm able to give 100 of you $1000 dollars AND...AND I'm going to do it. If they know your word is good and honorable they now have FAITH.


When God said he so loved the world he did not say just the especially blessed. But ALL! And because he said that ALL can have FAITH. I'd say woe to the one who seeks to strip it away from others.

This should be easy to substantiate. Please show us any Calvinist writer that says faith isn’t important, necessary, etc.

 

[Hammster]

Some light reading.

Of Justifying Faith by Thomas Goodwin

 

[John Mullally]

Thanks for the post but you're off the subject of the OP. The OP is talking in what way the Calvinist message put's faith into the hearts and minds of the hearers. It seems they're given no absolute substantial faith God is willing to save them. The Calvinist message is God could but you never know for sure.

You probably were not thinking this, but Calvin raises the specter that God enlightens some men for a time, but then smites them with greater blindness.

"Many are called, but few are chosen," (Mt. 22:14), is also very improperly interpreted (see Book 3, chap. 2, sec. 11, 12). There will be no ambiguity in it, if we attend to what our former remarks ought to have made clear--viz. that there are two species of calling: for there is an universal call, by which God, through the external preaching of the word, invites all men alike, even those for whom he designs the call to be a savor of death, and the ground of a severer condemnation. Besides this there is a special call which, for the most part, God bestows on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit he causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts. Sometimes, however, he communicates it also to those whom he enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards, in just punishment for their ingratitude, he abandons and smites with greater blindness. Now, our Lord seeing that the gospel was published far and wide, was despised by multitudes, and justly valued by few, describes God under the character of a King, who, preparing a great feast, sends his servants all around to invite a great multitude, but can only obtain the presence of a very few, because almost all allege causes of excuse; at length, in consequence of their refusal, he is obliged to send his servants out into the highways to invite every one they meet. John Calvin, Institutes 3.24.8​

 

[John Mullally]

Some light reading.

Of Justifying Faith by Thomas Goodwin

This is dumping - its nearly 1000 pages.

It is best to identify your point and support it with a reasonable amount of information.

 

[Hammster]

This is dumping - its nearly 1000 pages.

Identify your point and support it - if necessarying quoting this book or referencing a chapter.

Well, the whole book, by a Calvinist, is about faith. And I can find many more. It basically obliterates the point of the OP.

 

[John Mullally]

Well, the whole book, by a Calvinist, is about faith. And I can find many more. It basically obliterates the point of the OP.

That is not an argument.

 

[Hammster]

That is not an argument.

Of course it is. The OP asks

Is there faith in the Calvinist system?

I gave a link to a free book that shows definitively that there is. I can produce more, if that’s not enough.

 

[John Mullally]

I gave a link to a free book that shows definitively that there is. I can produce more, if that’s not enough.

Given the length of the book, perhaps you can point out the one or two chapters that would be most useful given what the OP has stated. Why would you be a hypocrite by recommending reading a near 1000 page book that you did not fully read?

In the meantime, I will reiterate what scripture says concerning faith: Romans 10:17 says that faith comes by hearing the word of God and we all decide what we listen to. Although Jesus healed many and stressed the need for faith, he did nothing to give or increase faith when asked. When the disciples asked Jesus to give them more faith and He told them to use what they had. Again, per Romans 10:17, faith comes from man hearing the word of God - thus, God does not dispence it without man's hearing the word of God.

 

[ozso]

Can you name a Christian tradition where all the members of that tradition agree? I bet you can't.

Which is a reason why I don't wholly subscribe to most.

 

[Bobber]

This reminded me of the oft quoted Scripture: "No man cometh unto Me/Jesus/ unless a " calvnist? " draws him to Me" ? oops.... nope.
No religion can claim they draw a man to Jesus, any more than Jesus Himself claimed to do so.... and I don't remember Jesus Saying He Did, only the Father can do so...

To be fair I don't think the poster was exalting humans for doing their part as vessels of God to lead people to Christ.

 

[Bobber]

For the Praise of His Glory.

But is that really an answer? I've seen many Calvinists even acknowledge they can't tell exactly why God chooses one and not another. I just don't think one can utter out to the praise of his glory. What does that mean? If you're going to use the word PRAISE what is it about saying some can be saved and not others when according to Calvinism all need what they call irresistible grace to even serve him. So how do we praise his glory by one willing to save 3 people out of 10 let's say if they need rescued from drowning when he can just as easily save all?

Calvinists could go into great detail as to why limiting salvation and leaving us who are saved quite humble in regards to our salvation Glorifies His Name,

But why would it glorify his name? It just seems some of these statements are uttered forth and one says OK there you go. But what has any of that told us?

 

[Bobber]

My husband is a hyper Calvinist, or so called, but I'm not hyper, I'm more moderate than he is. Perhaps your more thinking of his type?

I'm curious. What are the things that make you feel you're more moderate then he.

There are two calls, one general (and ineffectual) and then there's the particular call, that's the one that is effectual and is God opening the heart toward the truth.

So it seems you're having God ringing the dinner bell for all to come but REALLY for a meaningless purpose. You say God has to open the heart of one to the truth so a general call would have as I say no meaning.

In the general call people refuse it or claim it for some personal (see sinful) benefit because the heart is wicked, it's every desire is sin... It's just not a heart that wants God. They refuse because they love their sin. (God is not the author of sin).

I think all Non-Calvinists agree with this. I do.

If people want to think they have control over their sin nature and are not a slave to it in their unsaved state then that's their prerogative - I just know better..

And alcoholic may not have the power to help himself. Doesn't mean he can't call out to another who can help him. Even among AA that's what they put forth. Point. We all believe man's nature is depraved. One doesn't need to take an understanding of that in a measure that's not justified.

 

[Hammster]

Given the length of the book, perhaps you can point out the one or two chapters that would be most useful given what the OP has stated. Why would you be a hypocrite by recommending reading a near 1000 page book that you did not fully read?

In the meantime, I will reiterate what scripture says concerning faith: Romans 10:17 says that faith comes by hearing the word of God and we all decide what we listen to. Although Jesus healed many and stressed the need for faith, he did nothing to give or increase faith when asked. When the disciples asked Jesus to give them more faith and He told them to use what they had. Again, per Romans 10:17, faith comes from man hearing the word of God - thus, God does not dispence it without man's hearing the word of God.

You seem to be missing the point, even though I made it clear by quoting the OP. The OP is making an argument that there is no faith in the Calvinist system. If that’s true, this means that you could also argue that there are no books written about faith by Calvinists. Why would there be, right?

So to counter that claim, I posted a link to a book by a Puritan (one of many I could point to). It’s free. You can look at it. You can verify for yourself if the book actually deals with the topic. Whether or not the information in the book is true is not relevant to the discussion. That’s an entirely different topic.