The Hypocrisy of Calvinists

[bcbsr]

The Hypocrisy of Calvinists

Under Calvinism salvation is not by faith in Christ, but rather by a pre-birth election whereby God arbitrarily decides ones eternal fate, and that not based upon God's foreknowledge of some future faith. Thus people are born ether saved and eternally secure or unsaved and eternally damned, there being nothing they can do to change that fate in either instance.

Yet when asked the question, as the Philippian jailer asked, "What must I do to be saved?", the typical Calvinist will answer as the apostle, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved?" ("Believe" being in the imperative in the text and not subjunctive as if saying "if you were to believe", and thus, being imperative, indicating to the man that there is something he could do to be saved, and furthermore that he was not saved until doing so).

But if Calvinists actually believed in Calvinism they would respond something like, "There is nothing you can do to be saved, for your fate was determined prior to you being born and there is nothing you can do to change that fate." That's an example of the hypocrisy of Calvinists.

 

[Hammster]

Under Calvinism salvation is not by faith in Christ,

No need to read further. This is untrue, so the rest is as well.

 

[royal priest]

The Hypocrisy of Calvinists

Under Calvinism salvation is not by faith in Christ, but rather by a pre-birth election
.

Straw man

 

[Rescued One]

Straw man

 

[Rescued One]

No need to read further. This is untrue, so the rest is as well.

Amen. Faith isn't coming from Satan. Calvin doesn't give faith either --- GOD DOES!

 

[Albion]

The Hypocrisy of Calvinists

Under Calvinism salvation is not by faith in Christ, but rather by a pre-birth election whereby God arbitrarily decides ones eternal fate, and that not based upon God's foreknowledge of some future faith.

It IS the case (according to Calvinists) that salvation is by Faith in Christ and that coming to Faith results from a decision on the part of God made before the persons birth.

 

[Hammster]

If this is what the OP thinks is taught in Reformed Theology, then it’s no wonder Calvinism is so misunderstood.

 

[bcbsr]

It IS the case (according to Calvinists) that salvation is by Faith in Christ and that coming to Faith results from a decision on the part of God made before the persons birth.

Apparently you didn't really think that through. Do you agree that under Calvinism when a person is born they are already elect to eternal life or eternal damnation and that nothing can change their elect status? Yes, I understand that Calvinists propose that God, having already elected someone to eternal life will gift them with faith at some point. But that doesn't change their salvation status. For is a person is elect to eternal life, and nothing can change their elect status, then they are already saved prior to coming to faith in Christ.

 

[Hammster]

Apparently you didn't really think that through. Do you agree that under Calvinism when a person is born they are already elect to eternal life or eternal damnation and that nothing can change their elect status? Yes, I understand that Calvinists propose that God, having already elected someone to eternal life will gift them with faith at some point. But that doesn't change their salvation status. For is a person is elect to eternal life, and nothing can change their elect status, then they are already saved prior to coming to faith in Christ.

Let’s test out an alternative.

God knows John will believe the Gospel. God knows that Bob never will.

Is their eternal status something that can be changed? Can you ever convince Bob to believe?

(Hoping for a straight answer).

 

[Albion]

Do you agree that under Calvinism when a person is born they are already elect to eternal life or eternal damnation and that nothing can change their elect status? Yes, I understand that Calvinists propose that God, having already elected someone to eternal life will gift them with faith at some point. But that doesn't change their salvation status. For is a person is elect to eternal life, and nothing can change their elect status, then they are already saved prior to coming to faith in Christ.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong about this. If you are one of the Elect, you will be saved. But you will be saved through Faith in Christ.

So far, there seems to be agreement. But...

It is not the case that anyone is saved in the absence of Faith, so the highlighted sentence in your post is simply wrong--or at least we can say that it is not what Calvinists profess.

We may say that the Elect have been guaranteed, before they are old enough to know Christ, to receive the gift of Faith at some time. However, they are not saved without it.

 

[Jonaitis]

I feel like one day he will be one of us.

 

[bcbsr]

Let’s test out an alternative.
God knows John will believe the Gospel. God knows that Bob never will.
Is their eternal status something that can be changed? Can you ever convince Bob to believe?
(Hoping for a straight answer).

Calvinism proposes that election is not based upon God's foreknowledge of ones faith or lack thereof. So when you say "alternative" you're not dealing with the issue at hand, namely what Calvinism proposes. Since I don't know what kind of soteriology you're constructing I don't know how to answer in the framework of such a construction, nor would I find any relevance in doing so as I doesn't speak to the issue at hand - namely Calvinist soteriology.

 

[bcbsr]

I'm sorry, but you are wrong about this. If you are one of the Elect, you will be saved. But you will be saved through Faith in Christ.

So far, there seems to be agreement. But...

It is not the case that anyone is saved in the absence of Faith, so the highlighted sentence in your post is simply wrong--or at least we can say that it is not what Calvinists profess.

We may say that the Elect have been guaranteed, before they are old enough to know Christ, to receive the gift of Faith at some time. However, they are not saved without it.

You're contradicting yourself. Can it be said of the elect, prior to their coming to faith (Yes I understand that Calvinism proposes that faith is inevitable at some point), that it is impossible for such unbelievers to end up in hell? Not according to Calvinism. If that's the case then they have been saved prior to coming to faith in Christ.

 

[Hammster]

Calvinism proposes that election is not based upon God's foreknowledge of ones faith or lack thereof. So when you say "alternative" you're not dealing with the issue at hand, namely what Calvinism proposes. Since I don't know what kind of soteriology you're constructing I don't know how to answer in the framework of such a construction, nor would I find any relevance in doing so as I doesn't speak to the issue at hand - namely Calvinist soteriology.

It’s a simple question. If God knows that Bob will never believe, can you do anything to change that?

 

[Albion]

You're contradicting yourself. Can it be said of the elect, prior to their coming to faith (Yes I understand that Calvinism proposes that faith is inevitable at some point), that it is impossible for such unbelievers to end up in hell? Not according to Calvinism. If that's the case then they have been saved prior to coming to faith in Christ.

Not sure why you don't understand this, but I at least tried to help.

 

[bcbsr]

It’s a simple question. If God knows that Bob will never believe, can you do anything to change that?

As I pointed out, the question is irrelevant to the topic. And you yourself have not provided any rebuttal to the simple argument I had already presented.

 

[NBB]

It’s a simple question. If God knows that Bob will never believe, can you do anything to change that?

One thing is knowing other is imposing i guess.

 

[bcbsr]

One thing is knowing other is imposing i guess.

Good point. Calvinism proposes that election is not based upon God's foreknowledge, and thus imposing rather than predicting. And as such Calvinism is a fatalistic theology.

 

[Jonaitis]

bcbsr,

Have you ever thought that foreknowledge may mean something different than foresight? I briefly mentioned this in another forum where a topic like this is properly discussed. I argued thus:

In Calvinism, foreknowledge is understood to be the same as personally known or loved beforehand, rather than foreseeing some event in the future. Whenever foreknowledge is used in Scripture, it is always in relation to a person, rather than what the person does. God foreknew his elect, and saved them in that love he had for them before they were born. We are commanded in Scripture to grow in the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, and this is not talking about mere information (2 Peter 3:18, etc).

"We love because he first loved us." - 1 John 4:19

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[bcbsr]

bcbsr,

Have you ever thought that foreknowledge may mean something different than foresight? I briefly mentioned this in another forum where a topic like this is properly discussed. I argued thus:

In Calvinism, foreknowledge is understood to be the same as personally known or loved beforehand, rather than foreseeing some event in the future. Whenever foreknowledge is used in Scripture, it is always in relation to a person, rather than what the person does. God foreknew his elect, and saved them in that love he had for them before they were born. We are commanded in Scripture to grow in the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, and this is not talking about mere information (2 Peter 3:18, etc).

"We love because he first loved us." - 1 John 4:19

What are your thoughts on this?

What I think is that it's not relevant to the OP, which still stands unrefuted. Calvinism proposes that election is not based upon God's foreknowledge of faith or events. So "foreknowledge" is irrelevant to the discussion.