Logical Problems with Calvinism

[Bible Highlighter]

We are cursed through Adam and we are redeemed through Christ, these we can both agree on.

It is true that in Adam, all die and in Christ all shall be made alive.

You might agree also that we are no more personally guilty of Adam's sin than we are personally meritorious because of Christ's righteousness. We have inherited human nature from Adam and received from him the fruit of his iniquity by our birth. There was nothing we did to receive it, yet we are guilty of Adam's sin.

Our salvation is not something we are born with and it is not something that is earned. It is a gift from God for Him to give as He pleases, earned by the saving works of Christ not by the failing works of men. This is the truest example of His grace and mercy; saving those who, through Adam's disobedience and our continued rebellion, deserve nothing.

Salvation is usually misunderstood and is taken to one of the two wrong extremes. On the one end of the wrong extreme of the spectrum of Salvation is Man Directed Works or in thinking we are saved by keeping the Law of Moses. Some believe wrongfully in baptismal salvation and or in speaking in tongues so as to be saved. Some have even ignored the Substitionary Atonement and have emphasized that it is primarily man who must save himself by taking action. However, this type of belief does not leave room for God's grace. How does one receive forgiveness of their sin? Do they go out and do a bunch of works? Or do they fall down before the Lord and seek for His forgiveness? But we are not saved by Man Directed Works.

The other opposite wrong extreme of the spectrum of Salvation is Antinomianism or an ignoring of God's eternal moral laws or those Commands given to us under the New Testament (or in some cases it is a watering down of God's moral laws). In any event, many folks do not realize that the works of the Law (or the Law) mentioned in the book of Romans and Galatians is speaking of the Law of Moses and not all Law whatsoever. For it is written...

"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." (Galatians 6:7-8).

Paul says be not deceived, the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. Paul does not tell us how the believer is exempt from committing sins such as murder, hate, adultery, theft, drunkeness, and idolatry, etc. Paul says be not deceived into thinking anyone unrighteous will make it into God's Kingdom. For Paul asks the question, shall we continue in sin so that grace may abound? Paul's reply to that answer is "God forbid." Meaning, one cannot do so in order for grace to abound. I mean, read 2 Timothy 3:1-9. It is unmistakable. This is talking about how in the last days, some will depart from the faith and commit certain sins. These are self professing believers who have a form of Godliness, but they deny the power thereof.

Anyways, Salvation is a Person Names Jesus Christ. Salvation is Relationship-ism; And Salvation is not in what you do alone and salvation is not in simply believing alone. If one abides with the Lord, then good fruit from God will be evident in a believer's life. If such fruit is not present and sin and evil only directs their lives, then they are proving that another master is ruling their life instead (that is not God). Salvation is in God's mercy and by the washing of the regeneration of the Holy Ghost. One is a new man if they are in Christ, and they are not the old man. We are saved by abiding in Christ (Who is the source of a person's eternal life and salvation).


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

God in no way compelled man to fall. He simply withheld that undeserved constraining grace with which Adam would infallibly not have fallen, the grace God was under no obligation to bestow. Adam might have stood had he so chosen; but in respect to God, and His plan, it was certain that he would fall. He acted freely as if there had been no decree, and yet as infallibly as if there had been no liberty.

God was pleased to permit our first parents to be tempted and to fall, and then to overrule their sin for His own glory. This permission and overruling of sin does not make Him the author of it. He has permitted the fall in order to show what free will would do; and then, by overruling it, He has shown what the blessings of His grace and the judgement of His justice can do.

Will man be judged for all his sins if he rejects Christ in this life? I imagine so. Why is it any different if a believer is rewarded for doing that which is righteous?

Also, please read Ezekiel 18:26-27.

OSAS is just a reverse form of Calvinism. Instead of not having free will when you accept Christ for salvation, one can no longer have free will in regards to their salvation after they have made a one time choice to believe or accept Christ.


...

 

[nobdysfool]

Again, I ask you to stop making this about me. The Word of God is plain for all to read. In my opinion, the wrong interpretion usually takes place when one gets their ideas from others first before reading the Word for themselves. It is in my view that this is at the point when a person begins to see something that is not there in God's Word. For I believe no Calvinist today just read the Bible and started to see Calvinisim in the Bible all on their own.

I did. I didn't even know it had a name until later. So once again, your attempts to tear down Calvinism fail. As they always will.

And once again, the deflection. You made great stock about the word "should", as though it were not definite, only potential, and i pointed out that in Old English, "should" was a definite. If you actually knew what you claim, you wouldn't make that statement. I'm not making this about you, you are doing that all by yourself.

Anyways, you are making this about me because you just said now that am either lying or that I was not paying attention; As if you could not be wrong yourself in your interpretation of God's Word. So again, I ask you to respond kindly with God's Word as your defense and not some "I am right and you are wrong" type statements.

The typical "I know you are, but what am I?" defense. Old as the hills and twice as dusty. No, this is not about you, it's about rightly dividing and understanding the Word of God. You have a distance to go in that department...

Because the Scriptures do not say that man who is dead in his sins is not capable of receiving life.
Deuteronomy 30:19 says God sets before us life and death and He desires for us to CHOOSE life.
Jesus says, come to me.
The Spirit and the bride both say for the reader to come drink of the water of life freely.
Joshua says CHOOSE this day in whom ye will serve.
In Genesis 4, God told Cain he had a choice in doing either good or sin.
...

And as usual , soundbite verses taken apart from their context, to make them say things they don't say, at least not in the way you want them to.

 

[nobdysfool]

Will man be judged for all his sins if he rejects Christ in this life? I imagine so. Why is it any different if a believer is rewarded for doing that which is righteous?

Also, please read Ezekiel 18:26-27.

OSAS is just a reverse form of Calvinism. Instead of not having free will when you accept Christ for salvation, one can no longer have free will in regards to their salvation after they have made a one time choice to believe or accept Christ.


...

Because, of course, free will is FAR more important than salvation....<sarc>

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Because, of course, free will is FAR more important than salvation....<sarc>

Free will is merely part of one accepting or receiving Salvation, just as oxygen is a part of breathing.


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I did. I didn't even know it had a name until later. So once again, your attempts to tear down Calvinism fail. As they always will.

Doesn't matter if you knew the name or not. Did you learn of Calvinism (even without knowing it's name) from others or from your own personal study on God's Word?

And once again, the deflection. You made great stock about the word "should", as though it were not definite, only potential, and i pointed out that in Old English, "should" was a definite. If you actually knew what you claim, you wouldn't make that statement. I'm not making this about you, you are doing that all by yourself.

The origin of the word "should" at Eytomology Online points us to the word "shall" which includes a definition of "may."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=should&allowed_in_frame=0

The typical "I know you are, but what am I?" defense. Old as the hills and twice as dusty. No, this is not about you, it's about rightly dividing and understanding the Word of God. You have a distance to go in that department....

And as usual , soundbite verses taken apart from their context, to make them say things they don't say, at least not in the way you want them to.

You can hurl all the accusations you like at me. But I am going to say to you instead..... May the Lord's love shine upon you.


...

 

[Received]

Free will is a merely part of one accepting or receiving Salvation. Just as oxygen is a part of breathing.


....

Yes. God gives us oxygen, but we have the choice of breathing or suffocating.

"But that means you're working for your oxygen." Uhh...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Yes. God gives us oxygen, but we have the choice of breathing or suffocating.

"But that means you're working for your oxygen." Uhh...

I agree. I do not see how one seeking forgiveness from God by way of prayer in coming to the faith is a work, either. How can one even boast in themselves for something like that? The way I see it, calling upon the Lord is giving glory to God and His mercy.

Ezekiel 18:26-27 says the wicked man can turn from his sinful ways. Meaning, there is no such thing as Total Depravity where man cannot choose God without a regeneration. Yes, I believe a regeneration happens when a man calls upon God for salvation, but this is not a complete change of their entire being and will that makes them able to choose God all of a sudden.

...

 

[GillDouglas]

I agree. I do not see how one seeking forgiveness from God by way of prayer in coming to the faith is a work, either. How can one even boast in themselves for something like that? The way I see it calling upon the Lord is giving glory to God and His mercy.

Ezekiel 18:26-27 says the wicked man can turn from his sinful ways. Meaning, there is no such thing as Total Depravity where man cannot choose God without a regeneration. Yes, I believe a regeneration happens when a man calls upon God for salvation, but this is not a complete change of their entire being and will that makes them able to choose God all of a sudden.

...

You agreed with me that all in Adam die, and are dead. So we both would agree that we are spiritually dead from birth. What does that mean, exactly? Can a dead man call out to God to be made alive? It's not as much that he can not, but more that he will not. It would be out of character for the fallen to seek the Lord for forgiveness because he is unaware that he needs to be forgiven. The nature of the death which we inherited from Adam is contrast with the life received in Christ. A death which caused sin instead of holiness to become our natural element, making all things that are holy, repulsive. We can not go against our nature.

Lets look at the story of Lazarus for an example. Did Lazarus, after being physically dead for four days, call out to Jesus or did Jesus command Lazarus to rise? In the same manner, God calls out to us and commands a change in our hearts. It is He that initiates our regeneration, and it is at this point that our nature changes. Ezekiel is correct, a man can turn from his sinful ways, but not on his own and only by the grace of God.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Everything I have said can be backed up by both God's Word and real world examples. Can you say the same?

....

This is not true. Please prove your claim by providing an example of where a birth parent and child were able to undo their physical relationship.

Why would there be such a significant difference between spiritual and physical birth parent to child? There isn't. Which is why God uses physical birth parent to child to illustrate the spiritual relationship between parent and child.

 

[FreeGrace2]

If the seed of the Word that was taken out of a person's heart by the wicked one is an unbeliever, then it stands to reason that the seed of the Word that was choked or hurt in another is going to meet the same fate.

Just saying that "it stands to reason" doesn't make it so. You've got to prove it.

Besides, the Word of God is an intergrated message system. It expresses this truth elsewhere that a person cannot remain fruitless or outside Christ and expect things to go well for themselves. For it is also written…

There is HUGE difference between things "not going well" and losing one's salvation. It's this kind of vagueness that doesn't help your side.

"Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples." (John 15:4-8)....

It's the difference between relationship and fellowship. No believer will produce fruit unless they are in fellowship with Christ.

 

[FreeGrace2]

No it doesn't. Fellowship is in having a common fellow friendship or bond. Hence, the word, fellows ship. It's like friendship. We are fellows. We are friends. That is what fellowship is saying.

I guess there's no point in further explanation. It's just not getting through. I made it perfectly clear.

Fellowship speaks to the nature of the relationship.

Are husband and wife ALWAYS in harmony? NO. When they argue, or fight, they are OUT of fellowship, but STILL in relationship.

SAME for parent and child.

Not really. If a son dies, he is no longer a living member of that family anymore. Dead members of a man's family can no longer participate in family picnics, etc.

Let's just get out of the weeds, ok? Every human's soul will live forever, whether with God in heaven or in hell apart from God. So trying to use physical death an any example is fruitless and pointless.

In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, the father said twice that his son was "dead" and was "alive again."

Again, a reference to fellowship. The son was ALWAYS a son. But there was NO fellowship when the son was in a far country.

I'd love to see the reaction of ANY parent who has lost a child when you tell them that their child is no longer their child. And I suggest that you duck immediately after saying such a thing.

Let's say your child tried to kill you and your entire family. Let's say he killed half of the world. Are you really going to say you have a fellowship with a son like that?

Exactly! Thanks for making my point! There is NO fellowship with a son like that. But, he would STILL be my son, regardless of what he did.

Again, thanks for making my point.

Would you even want to say he is your son if he did all that horrible evil? I doubt it.

This doesn't matter. The FACT is that your birth children REMAIN your birth children.

Now, stop and imagine how you think God feels about sin. Do you really expect me to believe that a saint has a license to sin or that he has some kind of exemption or free pass to live in sin? Ever read 2 Timothy 3:1-9 recently?...

I always chuckle when someone drags out the silly "license to sin" nonsense. Guess what: everyone, by virtue of their sin nature, is "licensed" to sin.

Where does one get the idea that one needs a "license" to sin? lol

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You agreed with me that all in Adam die, and are dead. So we both would agree that we are spiritually dead from birth. What does that mean, exactly? Can a dead man call out to God to be made alive? It's not as much that he can not, but more that he will not. It would be out of character for the fallen to seek the Lord for forgiveness because he is unaware that he needs to be forgiven. The nature of the death which we inherited from Adam is contrast with the life received in Christ. A death which caused sin instead of holiness to become our natural element, making all things that are holy, repulsive. We can not go against our nature.

Lets look at the story of Lazarus for an example. Did Lazarus, after being physically dead for four days, call out to Jesus or did Jesus command Lazarus to rise? In the same manner, God calls out to us and commands a change in our hearts. It is He that initiates our regeneration, and it is at this point that our nature changes. Ezekiel is correct, a man can turn from his sinful ways, but not on his own and only by the grace of God.

I believe God draws a person and convicts them of their sin by light of the gospel by faith and He does not regenerate them before receiving this kind of faith. There is a difference. One is a revealing of God's Truth to a person so that they have a choice in either accepting it or rejecting it. The other is forced salvation.


....

...

 

[GillDouglas]

I believe God draws a person and convicts them of their sin by light of the gospel by faith and He does not regenerate them before receiving this kind of faith. There is a difference. One is a revealing of God's Truth to a person so that they have a choice in either accepting it or rejecting it. The other is forced salvation.


....

...

Does God draw all people to Him? Does God reveal the truth of their nature to all people? Do all understand the need for the saving grace of our Lord and Savior? No. However, for those that He does reveal Himself and the truth to, if they had the power to resist Him, why would they?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Just saying that "it stands to reason" doesn't make it so. You've got to prove it.

I don't have to prove what the text plainly already says. But if you really want to know, it is unmistakable that this is talking about receiving God's Word by faith and then enduring in that faith. We see the first person who does not receive the seed of the Word in their heart and have no understanding of the Word because the wicked one took the seed out of their heart. This is obviously an ubeliever in God's Word. For unbelievers do not understand the Word. Also, the devil is out to steal faith from people.

So this is our understanding and context that plays along thru out the rest of the Parable. Having the seed of the Word in your heart means you are saved. However, not everyone in the parable had fruitful seed of the Word in their heart because of various reasons. They did not have any root in God's Word whereby they would have brought forth much fruit.

What in the world can the parable mean if it is not that?
In other words, tell me what each thing in the parable represents.
Please reference Matthew 13:18-23.

There is HUGE difference between things "not going well" and losing one's salvation. It's this kind of vagueness that doesn't help your side.

Is this what you think the parable is talking about? I just do not see that. What do you think the seed of the Word represents? Is it not the receiving of the Word of God (i.e. salvation)? How do you explain away the first person who did not receive the Word and had no understanding whereby the wicked one stole the seed out of their heart? Can you not see that this first person is an unsaved individual and that salvation is dependent upon receiving the Word (i.e. the gospel)?

It's the difference between relationship and fellowship.

No. If I have fellowship with a brother, I am also having a relationship with them. It's no different with God.

No believer will produce fruit unless they are in fellowship with Christ.

No believer is saved if they are fruitless in their walk with God (or for those who are to live out their faith). James says faith without works is dead. This is not man directed works but they are God directed works. Meaning, if God abides in a person, then they have salvation. Meaning, if God abides in a person the fruit of the Lord will also be evident in their life, too.


...

 

[Marvin Knox]

I believe the Bible's teaching that Christ died for all sin. Therefore, sin is NOT the reason anyone goes to hell.

Rev 20:15 give us the actual reason why people will go to hell: for not having eternal life. A gift of God that is free.

Men are without excuse. They are in Hell because of the sins they committed - plain and simple.

They are not in Hell simply because they did not respond properly to the gospel when preached to them.

They are there because of their sins. They are without excuse.

"And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds." Revelation 20:12-13

I suppose you believe that an Eskimo who lived on the North Slope of Russia in the year 950 is in Hell for not accepting the free gift of eternal life when it was preached to him.

Exactly who do you think preached this gospel to him - a talking walrus?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You agreed with me that all in Adam die, and are dead. So we both would agree that we are spiritually dead from birth. What does that mean, exactly? Can a dead man call out to God to be made alive? It's not as much that he can not, but more that he will not. It would be out of character for the fallen to seek the Lord for forgiveness because he is unaware that he needs to be forgiven. The nature of the death which we inherited from Adam is contrast with the life received in Christ. A death which caused sin instead of holiness to become our natural element, making all things that are holy, repulsive. We can not go against our nature.

Lets look at the story of Lazarus for an example. Did Lazarus, after being physically dead for four days, call out to Jesus or did Jesus command Lazarus to rise? In the same manner, God calls out to us and commands a change in our hearts. It is He that initiates our regeneration, and it is at this point that our nature changes. Ezekiel is correct, a man can turn from his sinful ways, but not on his own and only by the grace of God.

Well, nowhere at the Fall was Adam ever told of the curse of Adam's new inability to choose God. For such a curse makes all the other ones pale by comparison. Why would God leave out mentioning such a curse to Adam? In other words, I think you are taking the analogy too far. Jesus said he was a door. That does not mean Jesus actually opens like a door in the fact that he has to swing on hinges. There is a point of taking an analogy beyond what the truth of what it was designed to communicate. In other words, a spiritually dead person is someone who is not a slave to doing the righteousness of God. The spiritually dead person lives in sin and a part from God but that does not mean they are not capable of turning from their wicked ways if they choose to do so (Again, see Ezekiel 18:26-27). The spiritually dead person who refuses Jesus in this life will be destroyed by the Second Death. What is the Second Death? The Lake of Fire. They will be erased from existence there. Burned up. They will be dead. Turned to ashes and be no more. God will have the victory and wipe out his enemies like he has always done. They will not have eternal life and live on forever.


...

 

[GillDouglas]

Well, nowhere at the Fall was Adam ever told of the curse of Adam's new inability to choose God. For such a curse makes all the other ones pale by comparison. Why would God leave out mentioning such a curse to Adam? In other words, I think you are taking the analogy too far. Jesus said he was a door. That does not mean Jesus actually opens like a door in the fact that he has to swing on hinges. There is a point of taking an analogy beyond what the truth of what it was designed to communicate. In other words, a spiritually dead person is someone who is not a slave to doing the righteousness of God. The spiritually dead person lives in sin and a part from God but that does not mean they are not capable of turning from their wicked ways if they choose to do so (Again, see Ezekiel 18:26-27). The spiritually dead person who refuses Jesus in this life will be destroyed by the Second Death. What is the Second Death? The Lake of Fire. They will be erased from existence there. Burned up. They will be dead. Turned to ashes and be no more. God will have the victory and wipe out his enemies like he has always done. They will not have eternal life and live on forever.


...

Adam was told that if he ate the fruit that God had forbidden he would die. He disobeyed by eating the fruit, but didn't physically die right away. Was God lying? No, of course not. Adam lived many years after the fall, but he was spiritually dead and was alienated from God, cast out of paradise. How then would he or any of his descendants be able to return to God in paradise? The spiritually dead is a slave to sin and has no desire to return to God to begin with. For the sake of argument, let's say he goes against his nature and seeks fellowship with God. How does he return? On his own merit? Never, not even close. By saying 'sorry' and 'please'? Closer, but no that doesn't cleanse or cover up the stain brought on by Adam. Accepting the gift of Christ's sacrifice? Yes almost there, but how does the spiritually dead receive such a great spiritual gift? One must be made spiritually alive again by the grace and mercy of God. The veil must be lifted and the heart must be softened by the love of God, first. Not by ANY single thing a man has, can or will ever do. Period. Only then can he understand the need and graciously accept the gift.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Does God draw all people to Him?

Yes, for Jesus said,

"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." (John 12:32).

Does God reveal the truth of their nature to all people?

Yes, for Jesus also said,

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; " (John 16:7-9).

Now, I want you to just stop and think about the bolded words in the above passage. The Holy Spirit will reprove the world of their sin because they don't believe on Jesus. This is a cause and effect based on something man is not doing. Man is not believing God and therefore God is reproving man of his sin because of it. For it makes no sense for God to reprove the world of sin for something God did. God did not force unbelief upon man here. Man is not choosing to believe.

Do all understand the need for the saving grace of our Lord and Savior? No.

While an unbeliever may not fully grasp the need for a Savior, that does not mean they are without excuse in rejecting the gospel. A person can hear the message of the gospel and just simply reject it because they don't want it.

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48).

Okay, this passage above surely does not sound like God is in support of a forced regeneration. Jesus says man has the ability to reject Him, and His words. However, if man does so, then He (Jesus) will judge them by His very own Word at the Judgment for doing so.

Men simply remain in darkness and reject the light of Christ and the gospel because of their own pride, sin, or evil.

However, for those that He does reveal Himself and the truth to, if they had the power to resist Him, why would they?

Because all who do evil hate the light. For they prefer the pleasure of their own sin instead of God or Christ (See John 3:20-19).


....

 

[FreeGrace2]

I don't have to prove what the text plainly already says.

Actually, you haven't proven that the text SAYS what you claim it SAYS. In reality, it is just that you think it MEANS what you claim. But it does NOT say what you claim.

But if you really want to know, it is unmistakable that this is talking about receiving God's Word by faith and then enduring in that faith.

I don't deny that all believers are commanded to endure in their faith. Of course they are to do that. But NOT to keep their salvation.

What in the world can the parable mean if it is not that?
In other words, tell me what each thing in the parable represents.
Please reference Matthew 13:18-23.

How about referencing all 3 parables of the soils? Because they all say the same thing.

How many soils produced plants? 3 did
How many soils produced fruit? 1 did
How many soils didn't receive the seed? 1 did

The fact that the seeds resulted in 3 plants indicates that regeneration occurred in those 3 soils. However, the point of the soil is fruit production. Those believers whose faith ceases due to trials, tests or temptations cannot produce fruit. Same for those believers who have gotten distracted by life's various distractions. They don't produce fruit either.

The parable is about producing fruit and the kinds of things that keep the believer from producing fruit.

What it's not about is how to get saved or remain saved. Because there are no verses about how to remain saved.

Once saved, always sealed.

No. If I have fellowship with a brother, I am also having a relationship with them. It's no different with God.

You're free to have your own opinion but I've explained it well enough.

Your example of a brother misses the point, and the Bible never calls God our brother. He is our Heavenly Father. So let's stay with that.

Once again, the relationship between parent and child is PERMANENT. And you've not demonstrated otherwise.

Fellowship is the nature of that relationship. That's how they are different.

Even in your example of a brother, which is also a relationship if he came from your same parents, that is PERMANENT. However, fellowship is quite a different thing. You MAY have fellowship with him, or maybe not. Thats why fellowship relates to the nature of your permanent relationship.

No believer is saved if they are fruitless in their walk with God (or for those who are to live out their faith).

Yet, Eph 2:9 is extremely clear: not by works, so that no one can boast. And this follows v.8 - we are saved by grace through faith.

It seems your view contradicts Scripture.

No one is saved by their fruit, or loses their salvation if they are fruitless, and there are no verses that support such an idea.