The worst thing about Calvinism

[Si_monfaith]

I really think the worst thing about Calvinism, T.U.L.I.P., or "Doctrines of Grace" (which is an oxymoron and misuse of the word grace), besides condemning millions to eternal damnation with no hope, is the way this theology slanders the character of God.

August 24, 2017
Hunt, Dave
It is a libel on the character of God to suggest that billions will go to hell simply because God didn’t want them in heaven—not because I have made this judgment, but because the Bible itself tells me in the clearest of terms that God loves the whole world, He sent His Son to redeem the whole world, and He wants the whole world to be saved. All other verses about election must take this fact into account.


"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

—1 John:2:2
Apples of Gold - August 24

World or whole world in the above verses refer only to those who believe in His Son and not to the whole world literally.

Secondly, it is Jesus who begins and ends faith (Heb 12:2). Faith (assurance that Jesus saves) cannot be produced by anyone. Believing or confessing is an absolute impossibility without the freely given faith.

Believing & confessing are done only to testify about Jesus who saves and not to earn salvation.

 

[OzSpen]

The jailer asked what needs to do. Why? Because he was born again after seeing the miracle which glorified the gospel. Then the gospel of Jesus' was preached in detail. Then followed good works of washing their stripes, feeding, rejoicing and last believing.

Simon,

This is what the text of Acts 16:25-35 (ESV) states:

The Philippian Jailer Converted
25 About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them, 26 and suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken. And immediately all the doors were opened, and everyone's bonds were unfastened. 27 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” 29 And the jailera]">[a] called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. 34 Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God.

35 But when it was day, the magistrates sent the police, saying, “Let those men go.”​

Your statement, 'Because he was born again after seeing the miracle which glorified the gospel', is an invention - eisegesis. There is not a word of regeneration prior to faith in this Scripture.

To 'be saved', the jailer and his household had to 'believe in the Lord Jesus'. THEY believed; thanks be to God. Baptism came AFTER believing.

Oz

 

[Hammster]

You didn't answer my question. What did the Philippian jailer do according to Acts 16:31?

Where in that narrative does it say when the jailer was regenerated?

My guess, based on previous encounters, is you'll most likely deflect by citing some fallacy I've most likely committed. So for anyone who is reading, I'll say that nowhere is regeneration mentioned in Acts 16. It's a narrative. So there's no way to determine whether the jailer was born again before or after he believed. That's why there's didactic writings in scripture, so that we can learn about the behind the scenes stuff that occurs.

So any time you see someone use Acts 16 to prove faith before regeneration, you can be sure they are grasping at straws.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I really think the worst thing about Calvinism, T.U.L.I.P., or "Doctrines of Grace" (which is an oxymoron and misuse of the word grace), besides condemning millions to eternal damnation with no hope, is the way this theology slanders the character of God.

August 24, 2017
Hunt, Dave
It is a libel on the character of God to suggest that billions will go to hell simply because God didn’t want them in heaven—not because I have made this judgment, but because the Bible itself tells me in the clearest of terms that God loves the whole world, He sent His Son to redeem the whole world, and He wants the whole world to be saved. All other verses about election must take this fact into account.


"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

—1 John:2:2
Apples of Gold - August 24

When it comes to TULIP, there's a lot I don't especially agree with.

T basically posits that we're all wicked. Considering how we all sin, that seems like an easy thing to agree with at first. But the problem for me came with the notion of non-Christian charity, rescue and relief efforts. If God is the sole source of virtue (as seems to be the Calvinist position), how can people who actively reject Him engage in acts of legit charity?

For U, I almost don't even see the point in discussing it because we can't possibly know for certain on this side of the veil. It might make for a lively philosophical discussion but considering the lack of certainty we all necessarily grapple with on this subject, what value does that offer to people and their souls? I certainly don't think someone's salvation hinges on whether they believe in any of TULIP, least of all U.

L and I are a bit similar in that regard. Conversation fodder, perhaps, but of what real value?

P... I don't buy it. I just don't. Who knows? Maybe someday God Himself will tell me that P was right on the mark the entire time. But that's what it would take because I don't believe in P and I can't imagine ever changing my mind.

In the final analysis, I find TULIP to be internally consistent from a rhetorical standpoint. If one starts with T as the default assumption, you basically need U, L, I and P to make salvation attainable.

I suppose my own views of T come down to the Fall being complete inasmuch as we are fully immersed in sin. I simply find it impossible to see the Fall as absolute. On the contrary, the observable evidence of sincere non-believing people seeking God and/or those same people performing acts of virtue speak against any notion of all our consciousness being bent toward evil. Were that so, Christians would be the only semi-virtuous people in the world.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Simon,

This is what the text of Acts 16:25-35 (ESV) states:

The Philippian Jailer Converted
25 About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them, 26 and suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken. And immediately all the doors were opened, and everyone's bonds were unfastened. 27 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” 29 And the jailera]">[a] called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. 34 Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God.

35 But when it was day, the magistrates sent the police, saying, “Let those men go.”​

Your statement, 'Because he was born again after seeing the miracle which glorified the gospel', is an invention - eisegesis. There is not a word of regeneration prior to faith in this Scripture.

To 'be saved', the jailer and his household had to 'believe in the Lord Jesus'. THEY believed; thanks be to God. Baptism came AFTER believing.

Oz

"Believed" comes in verse 34. This is the last.

"Baptised" comes in verse 33.

Good works came in verse 33.

Miracle happened in verses 26 to 29.

Regeneration happened in verse 29.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

In the final analysis, I find TULIP to be internally consistent from a rhetorical standpoint. If one starts with T as the default assumption, you basically need U, L, I and P to make salvation attainable.

Wow! That's the most rational and intellectually honest thing I've read from a person opposed to Calvinism.

Addressing the "T". As with all of the other letters, there are better ways to explain the doctrine. Total Depravity does not mean that one is as depraved as he could possibly be. It simply means that one is tainted in all parts. He is stained in mind, body, and spirit.

This short piece from John Piper might help explain it:

When we speak of man's depravity we mean man's natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to restrain or transform man.

There is no doubt that man could perform more evil acts toward his fellow man than he does. But if he is restrained from performing more evil acts by motives that are not owing to his glad submission to God, then even his "virtue" is evil in the sight of God.

Romans 14:23 says, "Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." This is a radical indictment of all natural "virtue" that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God's grace.

The terrible condition of man's heart will never be recognized by people who assess it only in relation to other men. Romans 14:23 makes plain that depravity is our condition in relation to God primarily, and only secondarily in relation to man. Unless we start here we will never grasp the totality of our natural depravity.

Man's depravity is total in at least four senses.
READ MORE
​

Total Depravity by John Piper​

 

[Si_monfaith]

Which "hell" is that?

Mathew 10:28: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Lord stated this about hell.

 

[Si_monfaith]

How does God give or grant repentance?

By preaching. How so?

Jesus said,
"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas." (Matthew 12:41).

Now if you were to turn to Jonah 3:6-10, we learn four things that are important here:

#1. Jonah preached to the city of Nineveh of God's coming judgment (Jonah 3:1-4).

#2. The king of the Ninevites told his people to cry out to God (Repentance) (Jonah 3:8).

#3. The king of the Ninevites told his people to turn from their wicked and evil ways (Nature Fruits of Repentance) (Jonah 3:8).

#4. God turned away from His judgment or wrath upon the city of Nineveh when he had seen the Ninevites turn from their evil and wicked ways (Jonah 3:10).​

"How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" (Romans 10:14).

Conclusion:

God "grants or gives repentance" by preaching. So 2 Timothy 2:25 is not a case for God enabling somebody so as to repent. That would be a poor way to read such a verse. We need more testimonies in Scripture that show that God enables a person to repent. But there is none. The rest of Scripture confirms that "grant repentance" is in reference to the opportunity to repent by hearing the gospel like Acts of the Apostles 11:17-18. For if we were to read Acts of the Apostles 11:17-18 as in reference to God enabling the Gentiles to repent, then we have to conclude that this is talking about Universal Salvationism. But we know that is not true. For not all men will be saved (Matthew 7:23, Galatians 5:19-21, Revelation 21:8). God is merely giving the Gentiles an opportunity to repent by hearing the gospel.


...

Preaching focuses to gather the elect.

 

[Si_monfaith]

What do I want you to explain?
The verses I posted in Jonah 3 that is the achilles heel of Calvinism (See Post #446).



I believe God is sovereign and in control of all things, but God does not decree sin or evil and He does not force salvation and or force damnation upon people with no free will choice on their part. You have to ignore all the many verses on free will in regards to choosing the Lord to make Calvinism work.



Romans 8:8 is talking about trying to obey the Pharisee religion along with the Old Testament Law of Moses without Jesus, and struggling with sin as a result of such (See Paul (Saul)'s personal account of struggling with sin as a Pharisee in Romans 7:14-24).

In essence "the flesh" is in reference to "sin" or (something not of the faith).

2 Corinthians 7:1
"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."

"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." (Hebrews 11:6).

"whatsoever is not of faith is sin." (Romans 14:23).



Question: Is not being one of Jesus’ sheep an unchangeable situation?

Answer: No, because while Jesus acknowledged that they were not His sheep, He also said: “If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.” (John 10:37-38)

So if that is a meaningful encouragement to become one of His sheep, then Calvinists need to explain why, if being one of His sheep is otherwise an unchangeable condition.



Notice the emphasis on the Father. They grumbled about the Son, but their problem wasn’t with the Son. Their problem was with the Father. The Father gives and draws and yet He was not giving and drawing them, so why? Everyone else who has “heard and learned from the Father”comes to Him (John 6:45), so why not them? And there can only be one explanation: They were not right with God. If they were right with God, then they would see clearly enough to come to His Son, who was carrying the Father’s message, just as Jesus said: “If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself.” (John 7:17) John 5:37-40 similarly states: “And the Fatherwho sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form. You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.”



The five verses in Jonah 3 that I posted.


Source:
Examining Calvinism - John 10:26
Examining Calvinism - John 6:44

Faith is begun by Lord. Man cannot produce it. Ref: Acts 3:16

 

[Si_monfaith]

"Do you believe God has the power and authority to save every single person?"

Jason replied:



All of these are possible simultaneously:

1) Man is made in God's image
2) Man makes moral choices
3) Man does not have libertarian free will
4) God wants to, can & will save all people who ever lived

God created man without the knowledge of good and evil (kge). So man was created naked. Man was not created a moral being.

 

[OzSpen]

Where in that narrative does it say when the jailer was regenerated?

My guess, based on previous encounters, is you'll most likely deflect by citing some fallacy I've most likely committed. So for anyone who is reading, I'll say that nowhere is regeneration mentioned in Acts 16. It's a narrative. So there's no way to determine whether the jailer was born again before or after he believed. That's why there's didactic writings in scripture, so that we can learn about the behind the scenes stuff that occurs.

So any time you see someone use Acts 16 to prove faith before regeneration, you can be sure they are grasping at straws.

So don't you equate regeneration with receiving salvation? Of course you don't as a Calvinist who accepts regeneration prior to faith.

However, Acts 16:31 doesn't have to mention regeneration because that's included under the umbrella of 'salvation', as is justification, propitiation, atonement, etc. They coincide with faith and salvation.

There are a number of Scriptures that affirm what Acts 15:9 (ESV) states: 'and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith'.

There you have the order crystal clear:

• He 'cleansed their hearts'
• 'by faith'.

He didn't cleanse their hearts by regeneration prior to faith but 'by faith'. That's Bible.

You can find the same biblical emphasis in:

Acts 11:18
John 1:12-13; 5:40; 12:36; 20:31
Gal 3:2, 5; 3:26
Eph 1:13
Col 2:12
1 Tim 1:16

The Philippian jailer inquired, “What must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). If Paul was Calvinistic he should have replied, “You can do nothing to be saved. You were born corpse-like dead in your sin and a dead man can do nothing. If God makes you alive then you will be convinced to believe our gospel.” But Paul does not hesitate to simply say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). Believe so as to have new life. Repent so as to live! That is the gospel appeal sent for all to hear it and respond (Soteriolog Y 101).​

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

"Believed" comes in verse 34. This is the last.

"Baptised" comes in verse 33.

Good works came in verse 33.

Miracle happened in verses 26 to 29.

Regeneration happened in verse 29.

Simon,

Not a word is stated about regeneration in Acts 16:28. You have imposed 'regeneration' on that text and that is eisegesis.

Oz

 

[Si_monfaith]

Simon,

Not a word is stated about regeneration in Acts 16:28. You have imposed 'regeneration' on that text and that is eisegesis.

Oz

Regeneration refers to the transformed mind that is willing to hear. This transformation is not a product of believing.

Believing cannot exist without this transformation.

 

[Hammster]

So don't you equate regeneration with receiving salvation? Of course you don't as a Calvinist who accepts regeneration prior to faith.

However, Acts 16:31 doesn't have to mention regeneration because that's included under the umbrella of 'salvation', as is justification, propitiation, atonement, etc. They coincide with faith and salvation.

There are a number of Scriptures that affirm what Acts 15:9 (ESV) states: 'and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith'.

There you have the order crystal clear:

• He 'cleansed their hearts'
• 'by faith'.

He didn't cleanse their hearts by regeneration prior to faith but 'by faith'. That's Bible.

You can find the same biblical emphasis in:

Acts 11:18
John 1:12-13; 5:40; 12:36; 20:31
Gal 3:2, 5; 3:26
Eph 1:13
Col 2:12
1 Tim 1:16

The Philippian jailer inquired, “What must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). If Paul was Calvinistic he should have replied, “You can do nothing to be saved. You were born corpse-like dead in your sin and a dead man can do nothing. If God makes you alive then you will be convinced to believe our gospel.” But Paul does not hesitate to simply say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). Believe so as to have new life. Repent so as to live! That is the gospel appeal sent for all to hear it and respond (Soteriolog Y 101).​

Oz

So my point stands. This just further illustrates it.

 

[Hammster]

Simon,

Not a word is stated about regeneration in Acts 16:28. You have imposed 'regeneration' on that text and that is eisegesis.

Oz

It's mentioned just as much there as it is in vs 30 and 31.

 

[Si_monfaith]

So don't you equate regeneration with receiving salvation? Of course you don't as a Calvinist who accepts regeneration prior to faith.

However, Acts 16:31 doesn't have to mention regeneration because that's included under the umbrella of 'salvation', as is justification, propitiation, atonement, etc. They coincide with faith and salvation.

There are a number of Scriptures that affirm what Acts 15:9 (ESV) states: 'and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith'.

There you have the order crystal clear:

• He 'cleansed their hearts'
• 'by faith'.

He didn't cleanse their hearts by regeneration prior to faith but 'by faith'. That's Bible.

You can find the same biblical emphasis in:

Acts 11:18
John 1:12-13; 5:40; 12:36; 20:31
Gal 3:2, 5; 3:26
Eph 1:13
Col 2:12
1 Tim 1:16

The Philippian jailer inquired, “What must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). If Paul was Calvinistic he should have replied, “You can do nothing to be saved. You were born corpse-like dead in your sin and a dead man can do nothing. If God makes you alive then you will be convinced to believe our gospel.” But Paul does not hesitate to simply say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). Believe so as to have new life. Repent so as to live! That is the gospel appeal sent for all to hear it and respond (Soteriolog Y 101).​

Oz

Faith is a given (Acts 3:16 - the faith which is by him). Man cannot produce it.

Believing & confessing follows faith.

Now faith is an assurance (Heb11:1). Assurance of what? That He has saved.

So salvation precedes the assurance.

Ozspen, Do you state that you earn salvation by producing faith followed with believing?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Faith is begun by Lord. Man cannot produce it. Ref: Acts 3:16

Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Acts 3:16 is just saying that God provides faith in the sense that He has made His Word available for us to believe in. It is not saying that He literally gives you faith by some kind of forced regeneration. No verse in the Bible actually says that.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Acts 3:16 is just saying that God provides faith in the sense that He has made His Word available for us to believe in. It is not saying that He literally gives you faith by some kind of forced regeneration. No verse in the Bible actually says that.

Willingness to hear. (Free gift)

Word that is preached. (Free gift)

Assurance (faith) that word is true. (Free gift)

Believing & confessing follows the above.

While all the first three are free gifts of God how can one say that he is saved because he believed & confessed?

Believing & confessing are done because one is saved & not to be saved.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Acts 3:16 is just saying that God provides faith in the sense that He has made His Word available for us to believe in. It is not saying that He literally gives you faith by some kind of forced regeneration. No verse in the Bible actually says that.

Not all who hear get faith. Only the elect do.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Not all who hear get faith. Only the elect do.

Not according to the Calvinistic idea. No.
We are told to make our calling and election sure. We are also told that many are called but few are chosen. Why would God bother to call anyone who cannot hear?