Logical Problems with Calvinism

[FreeGrace2]

So what benefit is there to a new heart? What can a believer do that an unbeliever cannot?

The believer can produce the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

The believer can be filled with the Holy Spirit.

The believer can walk by means of the Holy Spirit.

That's what.

 

[Hammster]

You are still being evasive in what you believe. Tell it to me straight. Break it down to me in a timeline.


...

I don't think you understand how conversations work. I wasn't making an argument. I was challenging yours by using statements that you made.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Here is a little parable I wrote to illustrate the Calvinist perspective on free will.

The "Liver & Onions Parable"
The Reformed Doctrine of Free Will

Suppose you detest L&O. The sight and smell makes you sick.

Just once, to appease a friend that insisted that L&O really is good tasting, you touched your tongue's tip to the L&O and the taste repulsed you.

You are invited to a buffet where a friend suggests you try some L&O. You refuse. He insists that the L&O is wonderful. He takes a bite and smiles saying "Just try it." You say, "No way!"

You freely reject the L&O because of your senses (sight, taste and smell). You do so on this occasion and every occasion it is offered to you. Your action regarding L&O is predictable and certain.

SUCH is the unregenerate person's free rejection of God because his heart and nature is only evil continuously.

===

Now suppose this L&O loather is supernaturally changed into a L&O lover.
God changes his taste buds as well as olfactory and mental responses. Now, at the buffet he asks his friend, "What smells so good?" He is surprised to find that the great smell comes from a plate of L&O! He is further surprised that it really doesn't look that bad now, in fact it looks good. He is salivating.

He grabs a fork and timidly takes a small bite to his tongue for a test. The test becomes a taste -- then he eats a huge serving. L&O has suddenly become his favorite food. From that day on he looks for L&O whenever he can find it and he specifically requests it. He is a L&O lover now.

He freely and predictably chooses L&O after this craving has been placed upon him by God.

SUCH is the response of one who is regenerated by receiving a new heart and nature.

====

BTW, in Heaven... Everyone loves L&O. Nothing else is eaten or even desired. All freely savor the smell and taste of L&O forever and ever. Hallelujah!​

​

The only problem with this parable is that there is no Scripture that teaches that one is regenerated in order to believe, or, as in your parable, to love L&O.

Regeneration changes the human being into a "new creature". And that new creature or creation is said to be "in Christ".

Well, Paul was clear about who is "in Christ". Only believers are that.

So there is no indication from Scripture that one is regenerated in order to become a believer.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

People are not MADE to like liver and onions.

They are MADE a "new creation".

It was not my analogy. It was Dr Steve's analogy.

This new creation simply loves liver and onions.

The old man still hates liver and onions.

No one can make him like liver and onions.

Same thing. If a person is made into a new creation to like liver and onions and or a person is made to like liver and onions, then that is saying the same thing. They are changed in some way to like liver and onions. The point is that you believe there was some kind of change by God that would over-ride a man's free will to like liver and onions.

But please know I am not against the concept of the believer in having a new birth and in having a changed and new nature. I simply believe this new nature is the result of when a person submits to God first. Do you believe a person can submit to God of their own free will? Yes, or no?

In fact, no one can make him do anything good at all.

He needs to be put to death.

Not denying that the old man needs to be put to death and a person needs a new nature by being born again. This is not a denial of one's free will choice of choosing God in this life. The point comes down to whether or not you believe God just makes some people to be believers and others to not be believers. That it was always in God's hands in who really believed or not. Is that what you are saying?

...

 

[FreeGrace2]

The jailer asks Paul and Silas what must he do to be saved. Does Paul and Silas say,

"There is NOTHING you can do." "You have to wait and see if God regenerates you first and then you will see whether or not you can come and accept the Lord."?​

But was this what Paul and Silas had said to the jailer? No. Most definitely not.

Paul and Silas said,

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."​

....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't think you understand how conversations work. I wasn't making an argument. I was challenging yours by using statements that you made.

Please do not take this the wrong way, and I say this in love, but there is nothing further to discuss if you do not tell me what you believe plainly. I have asked you repeatedly to tell me clearly in what you believe in regards to regeneration and free will. But you have refused to tell me.

So until you tell me, I am moving on from discussing this with you, my friend.
In the mean time, may God bless you.
And please be well.


...

 

[FreeGrace2]

Does it say that he was regenerated or justified? If not, it must not have happened, right?

Your question is bogus to the hilt. We know from many verses that we are justified on the basis of faith. Just like salvation; we are saved br grace through faith.

 

[Hammster]

There is nothing further to discuss if you do not tell me what you believe plainly.


...

I plainly believe I asked you a question about your post which you are refusing to answer.

 

[Hammster]

Your question is bogus to the hilt. We know from many verses that we are justified on the basis of faith. Just like salvation; we are saved br grace through faith.

But it doesn't say that in the text. That's my point.

 

[FreeGrace2]

As a seminary prof of mine used to say, "God tickles our willer."

Did he support his quip with Scripture?

 

[drstevej]

​

The only problem with this parable is that there is no Scripture that teaches that one is regenerated in order to believe, or, as in your parable, to love L&O.

Regeneration changes the human being into a "new creature". And that new creature or creation is said to be "in Christ".

Well, Paul was clear about who is "in Christ". Only believers are that.

So there is no indication from Scripture that one is regenerated in order to become a believer.

John 3:3

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Not hyper Calvinism at all. That is the standard view of Calvinism. It's called Total Depravity. The "T" of the TULIP.

But what do you think of Noah being a preacher of righteousness? Did the people in the global flood have the capacity to hear and listen to Noah's preaching and repent and believe in God? Yes, or no?


....

 

[FreeGrace2]

John 11:43 When He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth." 44 The man who had died came forth, bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth.

Lazarus was dead as a hammer when Jesus called him...

11:39 Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days.

What does this passage teach? Certainly not regeneration, because regeneration is spiritual, not physical.

What Jesus did with Lazarus was raise him from the dead physically. Not spiritually.

There is no connection between biblical regeneration and raising the dead physically.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm not being fuzzy. I'm telling you that you are incorrect in what you think hyper-Calvinism is, and that you should look more into it. If that's not clear, perhaps that explains why you have difficulties understanding what we tell you.

Well, I believe you are being fuzzy. So until you tell me what I would like to know, I am moving on, my friend.
May God bless you in the mean time.
And peace be unto you.


...

 

[FreeGrace2]

But it doesn't say that in the text. That's my point.

So what? Not every single doctrine in Scripture is found in a single text. You've made no point.

 

[FreeGrace2]

John 3:3

Please explain how Jn 3:3 explains your L&O parable. I don't see any connection. Sorry.

If one adds John 3:5 to 3:3, we see that "to see" and "to enter" are equivalent terms.

So, Jesus was telling Nic at nite that in order to see the kingdom of God, one must enter it. iow, God's kingdom is entered through faith in Christ.

The same principle was taught by Jesus using the metaphors of sheep in John 10. Those who enter by the gate are saved.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

John 3:3

John 3:3 is talking about seeing Jesus and or His Kingdom. It is about making sure how we first need to have a changed and new heart spiritually by God in order for us go home to Him and enter into the joy of our Lord.


....

 

[drstevej]

Did he support his quip with Scripture?

Yep...

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/...race_in_redemption/04_SLJ_method_of_grace.pdf

 

[Received]

Maybe you are just forgetting the discussion





So how does God help us concerning faith?

Ok, don't be grouchy with me when you're using salvation here and then faith there.

God provides faith, but that provision of faith must be kept or lost by us. Grace --> freedom, and not (Pelagian-wise) freedom --> grace.

 

[Marvin Knox]

It was not my analogy. It was Dr Steve's analogy.

Yes I know that. I was commenting overall on your use of and emphasis on the word "MADE"

Same thing. If a person is made into a new creation to like liver and onions and or a person is made to like liver and onions, then that is saying the same thing. They are changed in some way to like liver and onions. The point is that you believe there was some kind of change by God that would over-ride a man's free will to like liver and onions.

I don't agree that it is the same thing.

I do believe that there must be some kind of change by God.

I and Calvinists in general believe that man's free-will is not over-ridden. His newly generated spirit simply leads him to make the right choices.

I believe that that is a pertinent distinction. You probably do not. Hence the discussion.

But please know I am not against the concept of the believer in having a new birth and in having a changed and new nature. I simply believe this new nature is the result of when a person submits to God first. Do you believe a person can submit to God of their own free will? Yes, or no?

In a word --- YES.

Many Calvinists will disagree with me on that.

It becomes a matter of at what level we are talking about when we say "submit to God".

Many Calvinists will say that natural men cannot submit on any level to God. I believe the scriptures give examples which say otherwise.

Not denying that the old man needs to be put to death and a person needs a new nature by being born again. This is not a denial of one's free will choice of choosing God in this life. The point comes down to whether or not you believe God just makes some people to be believers and others to not be believers. That it was always in God's hands in who really believed or not. Is that what you are saying? ...

It probably needs to be a more nuanced statement than that to be understood.

But in a word (if that is required) -- YES.

Everything that happens in God's creation was predestined to happen by God IMO.