The Hypocrisy of Calvinists

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think I know what you mean, but I'm not using "fated" as some misuse the word "luck". I'm clearly using "fated" to refer to God's monergistic choice. So better to interpret words in context rather than pulling out of the air whatever arbitrary meaning a word can have. If indeed your objective is understanding someone else's viewpoint rather than to bear false witness by misreading what they wrote. That latter is a typical technique many use on these forums.

I am coming to understand that there is a difference between the Calvinism that developed in America and the Calvinism that Calvin and the British Puritans taught. I think the British position is far more balanced between election and invitation. The British position is that we take hold of the promises first, believe them and trust in Christ, then we use that as evidence of election.

It seems to me that many extremist doctrinal positions seem to emanate from America, mainly because of the American sometimes "over the top" way of looking at things. The British are more reserved and tend to go more for balance. But then, I'm biased, being a New Zealander, living in a country with a foundation in British culture.

 

[Hammster]

I understand your frustration. It has been a point of contention for centuries. You would think with all
the confusion within the Body of Christ that this belief causes, it would have faded away. But in fact it is growing and I have a good suspicion why. No accountability, a sinners crutch.
Blessings

You have no clue was to what you are speaking about. You should learn before you make outrageous comments like this.

 

[Hammster]

I already explained this to you previously. But if you're not actually reading my responses, what's the point in me responding?

What you call the premise not the premise. Again:

The first statement was proven as being what logically follows given the premise of Calvinism, as the rest of the post proved.

If A (what Calvinism teaches) = B (Calvinistic view of election)
and if logically B = C (Salvation by election)
Then A = C

Now if you keep calling my thesis as my premise then you're just bearing false witness against me.

Whatever you want to call it, it’s a flat-out lie as to what Calvinists believe. The rest that followed it was just further nonsense about what is taught in Reformed Theology, and because of that, your conclusion does not match up with reality.

If what you say is true, you should have no problem finding plethora of Reformed Theology writings that support your understanding. But you will not find one.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

You have no clue was to what you are speaking about. You should learn before you make outrageous comments like this.

Outrageous? Or maybe not to your liking. My apology for hitting a nerve.

 

[Hammster]

Outrageous? Or maybe not to your liking. My apology for hitting a nerve.

The nerve that’s hit is the one where people make completely uniformed posts. If it was pure ignorance, made with some sort of humility, that would be one thing. But when it’s made with veiled vitriol, that’s a whole other thing.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

The nerve that’s hit is the one where people make completely uniformed posts. If it was pure ignorance, made with some sort of humility, that would be one thing. But when it’s made with veiled vitriol, that’s a whole other thing.

All I know is God is merciful (compassionate), and that does not fit into this paradigm.
Blessings

PS: If you have not noticed, there is much distention in the Body of Christ with this post.

James 1:5
If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him.

 

[Rescued One]

One thing is knowing other is imposing i guess.

My parents imposed available vaccinations on me. I never contracted polio as my father did when he was in high school. Shame on my parents for not allowing my objections to their authority to overrule their choices. When my parents provided meals I was expected to eat what was served. Were they wrong to impose that on me?

Salvation is a gift. Do you give gifts because you are forced to? Are gifts wages earned or actually gifts?

 

[Rescued One]

Under Calvinism one's desires don't affect one's elect status, that being determined prior to birth and not dependent upon God's foreknowledge of one's future desires or anything else.

Are you saying that a person who desires his own will instead of God's can't be changed by God?

 

[Hammster]

All I know is God is merciful (compassionate), and that does not fit into this paradigm.

Then you know nothing of Reformed Theology. It’s all about Him being merciful. That’s why you should learn about something before you criticize it.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Then you know nothing of Reformed Theology. It’s all about Him being merciful. That’s why you should learn about something before you criticize it.

Then mercy starts with free will of choice.
Blessings

 

[Rescued One]

...No accountability, a sinners crutch.
Blessings

You are so wrong. Do you ever pray for a loved one's or friend's salvation? Who will answer your prayer?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

You are so wrong. Do you ever pray for a loved one's or friend's salvation? Who will answer your prayer?

If not being a Calvinist is wrong. Then I will pray for you.
Blessings

 

[Rescued One]

If not being a Calvinist is wrong. Then I will pray for you.
Blessings

Why won't you answer my question? This isn't a war. It's a conversation.

 

[Hammster]

Then mercy starts with free will of choice.
Blessings

Right. God’s.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Under Calvinism salvation is not by faith in Christ, but rather by a pre-birth election whereby God arbitrarily decides ones eternal fate.... 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.

The logic is as follows:
According to the Calvinistic view of constructing buildings, a builder decides ahead of time what structure he will build and where he will build it. Therefore, the structure exists when the builder plans it, and it never actually has to be constructed.

In this straw man you created, you claim that the Calvinist believes that the structure is built by merely planning it. Faith, which is the act of creating that edifice of salvation, you claim, would be incidental, because the planning created it.

The logical alternative, which you would have us believe:
The builder only supplies the bricks and mortar. Then he waits to see how the structure will build itself. The structure must not be planned out ahead of time, because it doesn't exist until it's constructed.

Both propositions are false. The first is only false because it misrepresents your opponent's position. The second is false, because it is completely illogical. The opposing position is that the builder planned a structure. He started building it because he planned it. He finally had a structure because he built it. That is the Calvinist position, and it's the only one that makes sense.

 

[Sammy-San]

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.

What could Hitler have done to be saved?

 

[Tree of Life]

I'm making an inference based upon what the propositions of Calvinism. If one's fate is determined prior to birth, faith doesn't change that fate. Are the elect, even prior to coming to faith, even in danger of going to hell. No, not according to Calvinism.

Consider the converse. When a person comes to faith in Christ, in what way is he actually "saved". He hasn't gone to heaven yet. Hasn't faced the judgement day. And he's still not fit for heaven, still not being perfect, though destined to be conformed to the image of Christ. And he certainly hasn't died yet. So even after coming to faith his salvation is incomplete, but it can be said in the perfect tense that he "has been saved" as that is his fate.

But under Calvinism that fate hadn't actually changed. It was when he became elect, prior to his birth, that his fate was determined. And yes, I agree there's a whole process involved, but fact is, coming to faith didn't change that fate.

Coming to faith did not change the fact that the person was elect to salvation. That's true. But there is a proximate sense in which faith does change our fate. There is a time when even the elect are children of wrath and not yet justified.

 

[gordonhooker]

What could Hitler have done to be saved?

This as per the scriptures...

Rom. 10:9-13 ESV
9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

 

[Sammy-San]

This as per the scriptures...

Rom. 10:9-13 ESV
9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Not on his own. We need God to draw us.

 

[Mark Quayle]

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.

Wrong. You misrepresent Calvinism.

Under Calvinism, salvific faith is the gift of God that is part and parcel with regeneration. That faith is the result of or even the very fact of God in us. It is not we who generate it.

You take the truth of what is said and pervert it to mean what it does not.

Furthermore, your claim that (apparently you suppose is logical) that according to Calvinism there is nothing a person can do, as if you have no responsibility, either you are or are not chosen, so nothing else matters (yes that is the same thing you are saying, if taken to its logical extreme), and that you may as well simply say you are saved from before you were saved --NO, God uses means to accomplish what he set out to do. You may as well say, Christ had no reason to die, since it was all said and done from before Creation. That is by no means Calvin, nor Reformed teaching.

I am not your typical Calvinist, by the way. So I can with impudence note that the Philippian jailer was afraid for his life --not for his salvation, in spite of what the usual Christian use of the verse has been. You will find it hard to prove from the verse and context, that Paul is referring to what Christendom has spiritualized it to say. The principle you hope to prove may well be true. But your text by itself does not support it. But either way, Calvinism does not disinherit belief. It is altogether necessary --in fact, we claim it is unavoidable, that the regenerated will indeed believe. And not only believe but pursue to the end. That does not relinquish anyone of his duty and need to pursue.

You have built a strawman, my friend. Yet it seems even your strawman is near too strong for you to knock down. Do you really think the gift of salvation is free, if there is something you can do, without which it will not be given?