Logical Problems with Calvinism

[St_Worm2]

Ahh, but I thought Received just answered your longstanding question He said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

But if the Father draws EVERYONE, then John 6:44 tells us that EVERYONE .............

 

[Hammster]

Ahh, but I thought Received just answered your longstanding question He said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

But if the Father draws EVERYONE, then John 6:44 tells us that EVERYONE .............

But if you deconstruct the text enough, you can get around that.

 

[Received]

But if you deconstruct the text enough, you can get around that.

And if your response to theological responses you don't like is "if you deconstruct the text enough, you can get around that," you've developed a pretty theologically impermeable position because of psychological maneuvering.

 

[Hammster]

And if your response to theological responses you don't like is "if you deconstruct the text enough, you can get around that," you've developed a pretty theologically impermeable position because of psychological maneuvering.

If that was my only response, maybe. But I've been asking the question and have yet to get a straight answer, even though it's right in the text.

 

[Received]

If that was my only response, maybe. But I've been asking the question and have yet to get a straight answer, even though it's right in the text.

Which question?

 

[Hammster]

Which question?

What does Jesus say happens to those God draws?

 

[Received]

What does Jesus say happens to those God draws?

I don't think there's a causal connection between these two sentences: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day." If there was a third sentence, e.g., "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. [Those whom I draw will necessarily continue until the last day.] And I will raise him up on the last day." That would be a different story.

 

[Hammster]

I don't think there's a causal connection between these two sentences: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day." If there was a third sentence, e.g., "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. [Those whom I draw will necessarily continue until the last day.] And I will raise him up on the last day." That would be a different story.

That might fit your narrative. But Jesus makes it clear that those drawn get raised up on the last day.

 

[Received]

That might fit your narrative. But Jesus makes it clear that those drawn get raised up on the last day.

It's never that simple. There's no such thing as a single verse that comprehensively establishes a theology. You're projecting your theology onto a single verse. The actual verse by itself doesn't make this clear connection.

 

[Hammster]

It's never that simple. There's no such thing as a single verse that comprehensively establishes a theology. You're projecting your theology onto a single verse. The actual verse by itself doesn't make this clear connection.

I'm not establishing a theology based on a single verse. But I think a solid argument can be made for the effectual call based on John 6.

 

[Received]

I'm not establishing a theology based on a single verse. But I think a solid argument can be made for the effectual call based on John 6.

Yes, but only IMO with a systematic theology behind it from other verses. My own theology, or anyone's, is definitely not immune to this. We can't just look at a single verse or even context and conclude a systematic theology from it. It's very hard to "unsee" your theology as projected onto a specific verse that seems to fit this theology. With this in mind, trying to be as neutral as possible, I don't see a connection between these two verses being discussed.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, but only IMO with a systematic theology behind it from other verses. My own theology, or anyone's, is definitely not immune to this. We can't just look at a single verse or even context and conclude a systematic theology from it. It's very hard to "unsee" your theology as projected onto a specific verse that seems to fit this theology. With this in mind, trying to be as neutral as possible, I don't see a connection between these two verses being discussed.

I wasn't always reformed in my theology. When I started here, I was very anti-Calvinistic. This was one of the passages that gave me trouble. All the commentaries I read were not satisfactory. They made sense when reading them, because they deconstructed the text. But when I went back to the text, and read it as a whole, all the explanations no longer jived. It was clear what the text said. I just couldn't get it to fit with my theology.

So the only thing to unsee was my own tradition. Once I did that, then the text made sense.

 

[Received]

I wasn't always reformed in my theology. When I started here, I was very anti-Calvinistic. This was one of the passages that gave me trouble. All the commentaries I read were not satisfactory. They made sense when reading them, because they deconstructed the text. But when I went back to the text, and read it as a whole, all the explanations no longer jived. It was clear what the text said. I just couldn't get it to fit with my theology.

So the only thing to unsee was my own tradition. Once I did that, then the text made sense.

Calvinism can't get off the ground for me given the IMO serious philosophical/logical problems as presented in the OP. Basically any time I read of a verse where God or Jesus (or a person standing for either) reproaches unbelievers or groups of people for not repenting or exhibiting lives that reflect salvation, that can't by definition be Calvinistic, because it makes no sense to reproach those who can't help doing what only irresistible grace, which is given solely by God, can provide. It's like blaming a rock for falling.

What specific verses in John 6 do you think hermetically seal the deal for an effectual call?

 

[Hammster]

Calvinism can't get off the ground for me given the IMO serious philosophical/logical problems as presented in the OP. Basically any time I read of a verse where God or Jesus (or a person standing for either) reproaches unbelievers or groups of people for not repenting or exhibiting lives that reflect salvation, that can't by definition be Calvinistic, because it makes no sense to reproach those who can't help doing what only irresistible grace, which is given solely by God, can provide. It's like blaming a rock for falling.

That makes no sense. It looks like you are saying irresistible grace provides people with the ability to sin. Or something like that. Can you clear it up for me? (Or maybe I'm just tired )

 

[Received]

That makes no sense. It looks like you are saying irresistible grace provides people with the ability to sin. Or something like that. Can you clear it up for me? (Or maybe I'm just tired )

I'm the one who's tired.

Will see you on the flipside.

 

[Hammster]

I'm the one who's tired.

Will see you on the flipside.

Sounds good.

 

[Job8]

So do you believe the Pharisees could actually keep someone out of the kingdom?

Isn't that what Christ said? False doctrine and a false Gospel can keep others out of the Kingdom of God.

What I find interesting is that several posters here (in this thread) go on and on about one verse without integrating it with the whole doctrine of salvation. When we take the entire sixth chapter of John and examine all the words of Christ, it is very clear that salvation is offered to all, but not all will be saved. Let's look at several verses:

SALVATION OFFERED TO ALL THROUGH FAITH (John 6:24-29)
When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither? Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed. Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

MANY WOULD NOT BELIEVE (John 6:30-36; 41,42)
They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. [SALVATION IS FOR THE WORLD] Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. [FAITH NECESSARY] But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not... The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? [MANY DO NOT BELIEVE]

THE FATHER GIVES BELIEVERS TO THE SON (John 6:37-39;43-45;65)
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day...Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me... And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

ETERNAL LIFE IS GOD'S GIFT TO THOSE WHO BELIEVE (John 6:40)
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

JESUS IS THE BREAD OF LIFE FOR THE WHOLE WORLD (John 6:46-51).
Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

SPIRITUAL TRUTH INTERPRETED CARNALLY BECOMES OFFENSIVE (John 6:52-67)
The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

So now we have to reconcile several truths: (1) salvation is offered to all, (2) Jesus is the Bread of Life for the whole world, (3) only those who are drawn to Christ by the Father come to Him, (4) many will not believe. We should also remember what Christ said that when He would be lifted up, He would draw ALL MEN to Himself. So since there are no contradictions in the Word of God, the only proper and logical conclusion is that the ones who are given by the Father to the Son are also those who are known by God (through Divine foreknowledge) to be the ones who will believe.

 

[Hammster]

The Father gives believers to the Son. Yeah. It doesn't say that.

And for what it's worth, I didn't bring up the verse. I was just trying to get the member who did to admit what it said.

 

[nobdysfool]

I do not need a lecture on how words can change in meaning between Early Modern English (1600's English) and Late Modern English (Today's English). I have studied the differences for quite some time now. But even if folks here were to twist the word "should" to not mean what it says, I have provided John 17 as a cross reference that shows that folk's interpretation on John 6 is not correct in the slightest. The question is: Will you be able to see what I pointed out?

...

Evidently you DO need that lecture, and some remedial reading, because you certainly missed it here. And following it up with the "I know you are, but what am I?" defense is very revealing.

 

[nobdysfool]

Also, why does God make some to believe and others to not believe? If all people have no ability to except God whatsoever and they are all evil and depraved, then nobody is good enough to choose God so as to be regenerated and changed for the better. See, good does not just appear out of nowhere or thin air. God would have had to have placed some kind of good into a completely depraved individual in order for that individual to be good in the Calvinistic view. Does this mean God is just picking people at random to be saved? Or is God choosing people based on how they will perform because He sees their future?

...

that's the kind of thing one would expect to hear from someone who believes that "all people are basically good" (completely unbiblical), and who believes that God saves people on the basis of some quality in them that motivates Him to choose them. Since God created them to begin with, then ultimately it is He, and not the person, who makes the choice. All you've done is back it up a level.

If all people have no ability to except God whatsoever and they are all evil and depraved, then nobody is good enough to choose God so as to be regenerated and changed for the better.

Actually, that is very close to a correct biblical statement. The only error in it is this: "nobody is good enough to choose God so as to be regenerated and changed for the better."
No one chooses God in order to be regenerated. They are regenerated so that they will choose God.