-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Understanding Calvinism
- Thread starter Pinkman
- Start date
- Status
Calvinist Proof text -
Ps 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
So a newly born baby is fully willing NOT to be saved simply because it was born 'Totally depraved" as ordained by God. After all the baby did not choose to be born. Being un-choosingly born in Adam meant its will was corrupted. Would that be your choice skala ?
However stripping out and isolating another verse e.g Ps 51:6
'Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place. Seems to nullify the first 'proof text'
Skala - Anyone who is willing to be saved can and will be saved.
All believers hold to this (except maybe hyper calvinist or even 'high' Calvinists). E.g Catholics, Orthodox and and Arminians. And why not for God surely 'taught them wisdom in that secret place'.
Skala -Non-calvinists/synergists/semi-pelagians/arminians don't credit God's grace with man's willingness. They credit man's free will.
Bit of a blanket statement here. How do you know this skala ? Many Calvinists are "inconsistent" as Cygnusx1 has told us earlier. An Arminian a few posts back has also proved you wrong. He DOES credit God's grace. Did you not read what he wrote ?
Just to be fair and complete, can any semi-pelagian viewing this thread post their view.
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
the bible (nor Calvinism) never says that God predestined people to go to hell.
Predestination is, according to Eph 1, an act of love on God's part whereby he rescues sinners who deserve hell and takes them to heaven. "In love he predestined us..."
When God chooses to not save someone, he isn't actively/positively doing anything, he is letting them go their own way, following their own sinful lusts all the way to hell. They are sinners that deserve hell, and he has chosen to withhold grace that is never owed to begin with.
That's not predestination, that's reprobation. So of course, there's no bible verse that God predestining anyone to hell. But there is plenty scriptural support for reprobation.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
An Arminian, with his mouth, gives God's grace credit. but he does so inconsistently because his doctrine cannot credit God's grace. At least not in any sense that gives meaning to words.
Can you show me how, logically, Arminian doctrine literally and actually credits God's grace alone with man's willingness and resulting salvation? Arminianism by definition is synergistic which means it takes both God's grace and man's will to produce "willingness." God's grace alone is not sufficient in this model.
Upvote
0
AndOne
Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
- Apr 20, 2002
- 7,477
- 462
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
From Romans 9 -
I am speaking the truth in ChristI am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit 2that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers,[a] my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
6But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named." 8This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9For this is what the promise said: "About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son." 10And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or badin order that Gods purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls 12she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
14What shall we say then? Is there injustice on Gods part? By no means! 15For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
19You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory 24even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25As indeed he says in Hosea,
"Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,'
and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved.'"
26 "And in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,'
there they will be called 'sons of the living God.'" 27And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the sons of Israel[c] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay." 29And as Isaiah predicted,
"If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring,
we would have been like Sodom
and become like Gomorrah."
Upvote
0
ConsumedByHisCall
Well-Known Member
If I offer you and Pinkman Super Bowl tickets but Pinkman, for whatever reason, turns them down and you go to the Super Bowl, does Pinkman's ability to refuse my gift make your gift any less real or appreciated? Are you going to thank me any less simply because Pinkman turned down my gift? Are you going to try to take credit for getting the tickets for yourself? The obvious answer to these questions is NO.
The same is true with God's gracious provisions. Just because some refuse it doesn't make the gift I received in my own ruined humble condition any less appreciated. And it certainly doesn't in any way lesson the graciousness of the giver. In fact, its just the opposite. Knowing that those perishing are doing so solely because they refused to accept the truth so as to be saved (rather than because God didn't chose to love them like he did me) makes me realize how deep and wide God's love and grace really goes.
Bottom line it this: The gift doesn't have to be irresistibly applied for the giver to receive full glory for giving it. In fact, the giver receives the glory for his provision even to those who walk away from it, if indeed it was genuinely provided. For example, if Pinkman had to turn down the Super Bowl tickets because of work conflict, he and anyone who knows of my offer to him would still appreciate my willingness to really give him those tickets, so in both instances the giver still gets the credit...unlike in your situation where God seems to be disingenuously offering a gift that he really has not purchased or has any real plan to give.
Upvote
0
ConsumedByHisCall
Well-Known Member
1. Who is "us?" Believers
2. What are believers predestined for? "Adoption as sons"
3. Haven't believers already been adopted? No, it is a process completed with the redemption of our bodies (Rom 8:32)
God is telling us what is destined for all who are "in Christ." It is a guarantee that this will happen to all who place their faith in Christ, because God has predestined it to be. Notice what the passage DOES NOT SAY. IT DOES NOT SAY, "God predestined certain lost people be become believers." That is a complete misapplication of this passage.
Just one problem with this answer: Who ACTIVELY AND POSITIVELY decided to condemn all mankind into a state of total inability from birth because Adam rebelled? Isn't that ACTIVE/POSITIVE decision of God doing "something" which directly causes not only their initial rebellion against God, but their inability to even willingly respond to His appeal for them to be reconciled back to Him?
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Believers were chosen before they even existed and thus before they believed.
Indeed but the process that God uses as means to adopt us, according to Paul, is "called, justified, glorified". We are called, believe (and are thus, justified) and utlimately glorified because we were predestined, not vice versa.
It doesn't say "God called everyone, and the ones that responded and were justified, he predestined to be adopted", does it? Nope, it says that he predestined them, and on the basis of being predestined, he called them, and justified them, etc.
Not sure about that, but either way, how does it lend support to conditional election?
The reason they put their trust in christ (Rom 8:29 - called, justified) is because they were predestined.
The point is that it's not called "predestination" by the bible. I affirm with you that God took action in withholding grace. Obviously he made a choice to do something, or rather, to not do something - save sinners. But the bible never calls this predestination, which is what my post was pointing out.
the first cause of rebellion is man's sinfulness and unwillingness to obey, not God (See the baptist confession 1689 or westminster confession).
Upvote
0
ConsumedByHisCall
Well-Known Member
God chose to reveal himself to the whole world and grant them all entrance into his covenant...first to the Jew and then the Gentile. At this time the Gentile is thought of as one "not chosen" and even believing Jews (Judaizers) are debating with Paul about allowing Gentiles into the church. They are saying things like, "Those unclean Gentiles can't be chosen of God, we are God's elect." And even those who compromise are trying to make the Gentiles convert to Judaism first so as to make them worthy to be one of his elect. THAT was the debate of Paul's day, not Calvinism/Arminianism.
So, how would Paul, "the apostle to the Gentiles," address the predominately Gentile congregations that he helped to start? How would he encourage them and strengthen them as they are being riduculed as being "not chosen" and the "non-elect dirty Gentiles" who God would never really chose to love and save? Might he say something like "I praise God that he has chosen you for before the foundation of the world." In other words, this has been God's plan all along to graft in the Gentiles and grant them entrance into my covenant. This is Paul's intent in this passage and many others. Calvinist's misunderstand Paul's intent of inclusion and encouragement to the the Gentiles churches and apply it to their soteriology of individual election of a select few.
Sorry, but that is not what the text says. It only tells us that believes have been predestined to adoption (eph 1) and to being conformed to Christ's image (Rom 8). It never says certain people are predestined to believe.
Do you deny the universal call of the gospel? IOW, do you agree with most scholarly Calvinists today who do affirm that God sent the Gospel message to be sent to all people? If so, then you have affirmed that God has called everyone, at least in that sense.
And if you notice, that this passage doesn't even mention the faith response of man. Does that mean its not necessary for salvation? Obviously not, Paul just presumes it, but we can't deduce if that faith response is irresistibly applied or not simply by this passage. He is just showing all that God does in the process of salvation.
What are you not sure about? In Romans 8:23 Paul clearly states that we are eagerly awaiting our adoption.
I don't believe in conditional election. I believe God has elected to reveal himself to groups of people at different times in history. He elected to reveal himself to Israel through prophets and the scripture. He then grafted the Gentiles into that tree of divine revelation making it available for them to enter covenant with him. (Rm 11) In the midst of all this He also has individually set apart appointed messengers from Israel to take the inspired Gospel appeal of reconciliation to the world. He has chosen some messengers, such as Paul for a noble purpose, but not because he deserved it or was better than one of the other Pharisees. He just chose him so his purpose of electing Israel would stand as they were the ones chosen to carry the message of redemption to the world. So, election is not about God choosing to effectually save an individual. It is about God electing to reveal himself to a group of people by which they can be saved....and the messengers chosen to reveal His truth.
I understand what you are saying. You are saying God is passive with regard to the non-elect, and that he just leaves them in their already condemned natural condition. But my point was to point out that it was by God's active DOING that they were born condemned to begin with. God had to make the determination to punish all mankind in this manner for the sin of Adam.
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
But surely you see the big elephant in the room my friend.
For the last 7 chapters Paul has been arguing that justification is by...what? Faith of course. Now consider the reader's reaction when Paul says "
"whom he predestined, he called, and whom he called, he justified"
How is one justified? Faith. So one could assert that the following is accurate:
"whom he predestined, he called, and the called ones, since they are all justified, had faith, in order to be justified"
Now tell me, are 100% of individuals in human history "called" in the sense that Paul means "called" here? Obviously not, or all would be saved. Surely you see that this calling is effectual right? (effectual calling anyone?) 100% of the called all end up justified. That means the called all end up believing.
If all the called believe, and the called are called based on being predestined, then that means they are predestined to be called, as a result, believe, and as a result, be justified.
How can you miss that?
Upvote
0
The Big problem is that they had no choice about being born sinners did they.
God ordained it that way so you are saying that God is responsible for everyones sin.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
cygnusx1
Jacob the twister.....
- Apr 12, 2004
- 56,208
- 3,104
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
responsible for what ?
you know God overrules all things for good ? Romans 8
has God consigned all men to sin or humans ? scripture says God did it.
Now what is your problem is it with God ? then read Job
I think your problem is with human understanding , then read Job
God can and God does decree all events for a good purpose , even if God was guilty of a crime (I am not saying He can be) who would rise above God and judge Him ? that would be like a gnat fighting a Blue Whale !
Upvote
0
ConsumedByHisCall
Well-Known Member
You mean the one representing all my arguments above that you ignored?
You know what they say, "The strongest points of one's argument are not typically reflected in the portion that his opponents address, but in the portions ignored."
Only if you accept your premise that Paul is referring to an effectual call, which is the point up for debate. You base that premise upon the fact that Paul only lists what God does in the process of salvation and he assumes the faith response of man. We cannot know from this text whether that response is irresistibly applied. We just know it is assumed to be affirmative because Paul is discussing the saving process of those "who love him" (vs. 28) and not those who don't.
Look at it from another perspective, so that you can at least view this objectively from our vantage point. Suppose an army recruiter worked all year recruiting a group of 25 recruits. He has them all meet him before they are shipped off to boot camp to be trained and addresses them saying something like, "To my recruits, the army will take care of it's own. To you who have been called, the Army has predetermined to conform you into a great soldier. To those we have called, we will train, to those trained we will take care of and make into great warriors."
Now, obviously this is just an analogy for perspective, not to be nitpicked. Just because he refers to them as recruits, should we assume he didn't attempt to recruit anyone else? To refer to them as being called doesn't mean no one else was also invited to serve. It is just a way of taking them through the process of what the Army has done and will do on their behalf. I think Paul's intent in similar, especially in light of the Gentiles in his audience who need to be assured of their being chosen and predestined to be taken care of by God in the midst of such great persecution.
I'm not "missing it." I used to teach it. I understand your view. I just disagree with it considering the entire context and the whole counsel of God's teaching through scripture.
I wonder if you understand my perspective at all?
Upvote
0
ConsumedByHisCall
Well-Known Member
For the choice of punishment.
If my child lies to me I, as his father, have a choice to spank him, ground him, put him in a time out...etc, or just ignore it.
God, according to Calvinism, decided it was right to punish all of mankind for Adam's sin by condemning them all to a condition of total inability from birth so that they are not even able to willingly respond to God's sincere appeal to be reconciled to Him, yet He holds them accountable for that natural and unalterable response.
How is that not an accurate representation of what you believe?
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
I don't deal with people who deny original sin. If we can't agree on the starting point how can we ever agree on the deeper things?
It's just a luxury that my view on sin is the historic view that has been asserted by all of church history. Your view was considered heresy right out the gates.
shrug.
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Let's cut right to the bottom line.
Who is called in Rom 8:29-30?
whom he called, he justified
How about 1 Cor 1:24?
but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
Tell me brother, in each of these calls, was 100% of humanity called? Or less than 100%? And in each of these calls, what was the result, the effect, of being called? In the former, calling results in justification, 100% of the time. IN the latter, calling results in, rather than finding Christ a stumbling block, finding him the power of God.
Are those effectual calls? Was everyone called with this effectual call?
Who is called in Rom 8:29-30?
whom he called, he justified
How about 1 Cor 1:24?
but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
Tell me brother, in each of these calls, was 100% of humanity called? Or less than 100%? And in each of these calls, what was the result, the effect, of being called? In the former, calling results in justification, 100% of the time. IN the latter, calling results in, rather than finding Christ a stumbling block, finding him the power of God.
Are those effectual calls? Was everyone called with this effectual call?
Upvote
0
Skala's previous post (296)
"the bible (nor Calvinism) never says that God predestined people to go to hell."
But they had no choice about being born 'totally depraved as ALL Calvinists keep telling us. So their destiny set before they were born ( predestiny) is hell !
HOW CONTRADICTORY CAN YOU GET ??
Cgynusx1 - post 196 -
The reprobate is left to his fallen devices after the Lord has several times witnessed to him , he rejects the truth , he holds it in suppression , the reprobate works very hard for his wages , he is FAR from an innocent victim.
But this cannot be right as Skala then says
"When God chooses to not save someone, he isn't actively/positively doing anything," so the Lord has several times witnessed to him NOT.
Calvinism in a nutshell :-
INCONSISTENT
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Cgynusx1 - post 196 -
The reprobate is left to his fallen devices after the Lord has several times witnessed to him , he rejects the truth , he holds it in suppression , the reprobate works very hard for his wages , he is FAR from an innocent victim.
Please can you help clarify things Cygnusx1. Did the Lord do this witnessing. If so when ? before birth or after ?
The reprobate is left to his fallen devices after the Lord has several times witnessed to him , he rejects the truth , he holds it in suppression , the reprobate works very hard for his wages , he is FAR from an innocent victim.
Please can you help clarify things Cygnusx1. Did the Lord do this witnessing. If so when ? before birth or after ?
Upvote
0
??? keh. Who denied OS ? My view as brought up in my youth was hyper calvinism. To repeat, years later I have come to doubt all that. I find non-hyper calvinists like your self just beating about the bush.
Upvote
0
Skala
I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Pinkman: even Arminians affirm original sin.
So who do you think you're arguing against?
Further, you seem unable to comprehend that your own argument backfires against you.
In your view, God knew ahead of time who would go to hell, but went ahead and created them anyways. He knew from eternity past that if he created "Bob" bob would end up in hell. Why did your god do that bro? Tell me? He could have stopped it. He could have prevented Bob from being born. He could have made Bob more spiritually sensitive and humble when he was fashioning him in the womb, so that Bob would have accepted Christ.
Yet God did none of those things, seemingly with no purpose, just random arbitrariness. What a horrific view of God you have.
So who do you think you're arguing against?
Further, you seem unable to comprehend that your own argument backfires against you.
In your view, God knew ahead of time who would go to hell, but went ahead and created them anyways. He knew from eternity past that if he created "Bob" bob would end up in hell. Why did your god do that bro? Tell me? He could have stopped it. He could have prevented Bob from being born. He could have made Bob more spiritually sensitive and humble when he was fashioning him in the womb, so that Bob would have accepted Christ.
Yet God did none of those things, seemingly with no purpose, just random arbitrariness. What a horrific view of God you have.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
