What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[QvQ]

1) As a person hears the Gospel, the Holy Spirit works within the person to convince them of the truth in the message. You called it seeing a light. You can think this as belief.

It is the Work of the Holy Spirit
Thank You
I was beginning to wonder if you hadn't invented a new form of atheism, "The New Atheism, Do it Yourself salvation without God, using old methods to achieve new results. Repentance is the key, no belief or faith necessary."

 

[John Mullally]

What do they know when making their choice, according to their inclinations, as to what is impossible? Their choice is real, and without a new heart and mind, their choice is always still unable to obey, unable to please God.

The conviction of the Holy Spirit is powerful enough to convict the world (i.e. the unregenerate). You can watch an old Billy Graham video and see people streaming forward in the altar call with some shaking and some in tears. That does not happen in a Ted Talk.

Once again, if you can demonstrate to me logically that uncaused free will can happen, I'll be willing to listen to your interpretation of scriptures that you take to demonstrate uncaused free will.

I don't consider God's control of initial circumstances to be strong enough to override the repercussions of Adam's sin (on man's nature and in him loosing the operation of the devil). A strong influence of the Holy Spirit is needed for anyone to respond positively to the Gospel. I don't accept the theory that the Holy Spirit selectively regenerates some and passes over the the rest to effectively assign them to eternal death - I don't believe it primarily because the Bible does not explicitly state that and because 1 Timothy 2:4 explicitly states that God desires all men to be saved.

People are held accountable for doing something they could have avoided, which is rejecting Christ. That demonstrates uncaused free will.

John 15:22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates Me hates My Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. 25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, ‘They hated Me without a cause.’​

 

[Mark Quayle]

The conviction of the Holy Spirit is powerful enough to convict the world (i.e. the unregenerate). You can watch an old Billy Graham video and see people streaming forward in the altar call with some shaking and some in tears. That does not happen in a Ted Talk.

What does that have to do with the weakness or inability of the unconverted to do anything that pleases God, or that is valid toward God by their own doing? If I didn't know better, I would think you were trying to make MY point. Yes, the Holy Spirit can do anything. In fact, he can utterly change the heart and will.

I don't consider God's control of initial circumstances to be strong enough to override the repercussions of Adam's sin (on man's nature and in him loosing the operation of the devil). A strong influence of the Holy Spirit is needed for anyone to respond positively to the Gospel. I don't accept the theory that the Holy Spirit selectively regenerates some and passes over the the rest to effectively assign them to eternal death - I don't believe it primarily because the Bible does not explicitly state that and because 1 Timothy 2:4 explicitly states that God desires all men to be saved.

The first half of your paragraph doesn't match the second half. Of Course! a 'strong influence' of the Holy Spirit is needed for anyone to respond positively to the Gospel! That's what *I* say! But then in the second half, you suddenly decide that the act of the Spirit of God is irrelevant to who decides what. And again, after how many times being told that no, 1 Timothy 2:4 does not state that God desires equally for everyone who ever did or will exist to be saved.

The notion that God made them for salvation but was powerless to bring about that salvation is frankly ludicrous. He made the lost for the salvation and growth of the Elect, i.e. for the 'producing' of the Bride of Christ.

People are held accountable for doing something they could have avoided, which is rejecting Christ. That demonstrates uncaused free will.

John 15:22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates Me hates My Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. 25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, ‘They hated Me without a cause.’

What they are responsible for is not what 'could have' happened, but what they chose. True, if they had chosen right, it would have demonstrated what 'could have' happened (only because it DID happen), but they chose wrong, so, (obviously, from our point of view), that is what happened, just as God planned. You have no way to prove that what has not been chosen 'could have happened'. You only have your assumptive way of thinking.

In Scripture God even speaks according to our thinking, yet doesn't contradict what I say here. He says that if Ninevah does not repent, he will destroy them, but he did not because they did repent. From our POV that means that he would have, and indeed from his POV it is true that he would have. But was it possible for them to not repent? NO! He saw to it that they would choose to repent. It did not happen by accident.

He complains to Israel, that if they would have only turned to him he would have done differently in his treatment to them: Psalm 81: "12 So I gave them up to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. 13 If only My people would listen to Me, if Israel would follow My ways, 14 how soon I would subdue their enemies and turn My hand against their foes!…" doesn't mean they 'could have'; it only means they should have.

 

[Clare73]

I want to revisit this question. The answer is simple, there is a difference between having someone punished for our sins and having the effect of that sacrifice applied to us.
I think even you Calvinists have to agree with this for you affirm even those Jesus were punished for (the elect) were children of wrath and separated from Christ before they came to faith. Why is it then so hard to believe that Jesus also was punished for people who eventually end up in gehenna, since they are children of wrath and separated from Christ? We see that even Christ was punished for someone, it doesn't make that person a child of God until he has faith.

Think of forgiveness by faith in Jesus' sacrifice as we think of grace.

God's grace is infinite, as are the merits of the divine Son of God's personal sacrificial death but, like grace, that has absolutely no bearing on anything apart from God's will that it have bearing upon.

Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
— Ephesians 2:3

remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
— Ephesians 2:12

 

[John Mullally]

What does that have to do with the weakness or inability of the unconverted to do anything that pleases God, or that is valid toward God by their own doing? If I didn't know better, I would think you were trying to make MY point.

We agree on many points.

Yes, the Holy Spirit can do anything. In fact, he can utterly change the heart and will.

When the person is willing.

The first half of your paragraph doesn't match the second half. Of Course! a 'strong influence' of the Holy Spirit is needed for anyone to respond positively to the Gospel! That's what *I* say.

Yup, we agree on many points.

But then in the second half, you suddenly decide that the act of the Spirit of God is irrelevant to who decides what. And again, after how many times being told that no, 1 Timothy 2:4 does not state that God desires equally for everyone who ever did or will exist to be saved.

Since God desires all to be saved, I don't see Him denying opportunity for repentance unto salvation to any.

The notion that God made them for salvation but was powerless to bring about that salvation is frankly ludicrous. He made the lost for the salvation and growth of the Elect, i.e. for the 'producing' of the Bride of Christ.

Its ludicrous to you because Calvin states that God pre-destined everyone's every action and did not leave any true decision making up to man.

What they are responsible for is not what 'could have' happened, but what they chose. True, if they had chosen right, it would have demonstrated what 'could have' happened (only because it DID happen), but they chose wrong, so, (obviously, from our point of view), that is what happened, just as God planned.

God uses man's shortcomings sometimes to accomplish His will as frequently noted with Pharaoh. But he does not plan for anyone to go to hell (1 Timothy 2:4).

You have no way to prove that what has not been chosen 'could have happened'. You only have your assumptive way of thinking.

Since God desires all to be saved, He is not barring anyone from being saved. Men can reject the draw of the Holy Spirit for the reasons given in John 3:18.

In Scripture God even speaks according to our thinking, yet doesn't contradict what I say here. He says that if Ninevah does not repent, he will destroy them, but he did not because they did repent. From our POV that means that he would have, and indeed from his POV it is true that he would have. But was it possible for them to not repent? NO! He saw to it that they would choose to repent. It did not happen by accident.

Calvin, not me, believes that everything goes according to God's predetermined plan - so to him God's will is assessed not by what scripture says, but by what happens. Jesus lamented in Jerusalem over their impending judgement (Matthew 23:37-39). The destruction was caused by the leaders rejecting Jesus - it was not caused by God's planning based upon Christ's lamentation.

Not only are things not all pre-determined, Jesus shows that God's will is not being done on earth at this time. Jesus would not command His disciples to pray "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" if that statement itself was not God's will. Note that be is in the present tense. Yet, God's will is not being done on earth as it is heaven as there is no sin, sickness, and death in heaven.

 

[Clare73]

I will have a go at this, even I feel I have a lot more to learn about it.

Very well, although it was not you that I asked to explain it.

First I will have to say this makes no real sense if you don't read the beginning of the chapter and see that Paul explains how it could be the Jews as a people were not chosen and
how still God's promise didn't fail.

Not quite. . .

That issue is resolved in the salvation of a remnant (Romans 11:1-5).

The issue in Romans 9:20-24 is something else:
the sovereignty of God in having mercy on whom he wants to have mercy and hardening whom he wants to harden, based on nothing but his sovereign choice to do so
(as in his sovereign choice of Jacob and rejection of Esau, Romans 9:10-13).

The issue in Romans 9:20-24 is the question, "Then why does God still blame us" when it's all his doing?

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
— Romans 9:20

The Jew that thought he had everything through the works of the Law is upset: "How can God not choose us, we who did what is right by the Law? Why did He make us like this, people of the Law if we were not chosen?" Paul's answer is that God has the right to do whatever He pleases. He can harden who He likes and show mercy to whoever He likes: "Who are you O man to put yourself over God?"

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
— Romans 9:21

Doesn't God have the right to do what He likes with what He has created. If He wants to show mercy to one vessel and harden another, doesn't He have the right to do that? If God wants to make of the unrepentant Jew a vessel for common use and of the repentant Gentile a vessel for honorable use, He can.

What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
— Romans 9:22

What if God who could from the very beginning have destroyed the vessels of wrath, who refused to repent, but instead endured them with patience, even they were heading for destruction. Not that God predestined them for destruction, but because they didn't choose to repent, God prepared them for destruction.

And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
— Romans 9:23

And God had patience with the vessels of wrath, those who refused to repent and used them to show His glory to vessels of mercy whom God had beforehand prepared a place for in heaven. In other words God used the vessels of wrath, even they refused to repent, for His purpose to bring in the vessels of mercy, who did repent, to show His glory to them.

God uses the vessels of wrath for the purpose of giving the vessels of mercy greater appreciation of his mercy to and love of them; i.e., to make known to them the glory of his goodness.

even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
— Romans 9:24

God chose to show mercy to not Jews only but also gentiles, to those who believe.

Someome else could probably do a much better job on Romans 9 than I can at this point, but this is basically my understanding.

 

[John Mullally]

It is the Work of the Holy Spirit
Thank You
I was beginning to wonder if you hadn't invented a new form of atheism, "The New Atheism, Do it Yourself salvation without God, using old methods to achieve new results. Repentance is the key, no belief or faith necessary."

We are both thinkers and I was somewhat neurotic. When I first became a Christian, it took an embarrassingly long time to sort things out so that they finally made sense in my head.

 

[Clare73]

Trinity: The role of each of these exalted members is clearly stated. And the fact that they are united is clearly stated. The Father is the head of the three per John 14:15-31. Trinity is a word that groups them.

Calvinism: If you start with the belief that "only the regenerate can respond to the Gospel",

If you start with no particular belief, John 3:3-8 and 1 Corinthians 2:14 still state the same, they do not change.

then referencing John 3:3-8, 1 Corinthians 2:14, and several other scriptures will confirm it. And that's where Calvinists are - and its hard to escape that mind set when you have already accepted their framework.

But that does not come close to proving their assertion. And it certainly does not address arguments made against it from other scriptures.

Understood in light of the whole counsel of God, including Deuteronomy 29:29, "other Scriptures" are not against it (Romans 11:33).

 

[Mark Quayle]

When the person is willing.

That's circular. God changes their will to willingness only if they are first willing?

Since God desires all to be saved, I don't see Him denying opportunity for repentance unto salvation to any.

Still using 1 Tim 2:4 by your notion of love.

Its ludicrous to you because Calvin states that God pre-destined everyone's every action and did not leave any true decision making up to man.

I don't decide anything by what Calvin says. I don't even know what he says, never read more than a paragraph or two of his. My theology is not his, except by resemblance.

I believe we do have true decision making. But I also believe it is caused.

God uses man's shortcomings sometimes to accomplish His will as frequently noted with Pharaoh. But he does not plan for anyone to go to hell (1 Timothy 2:4).

Still depending on 1 Timothy 2:4? You have yet to show me how that verse means absolutely all people who ever lived or will live.

Since God desires all to be saved, He is not barring anyone from being saved. Men can reject the draw of the Holy Spirit for the reasons given in John 3:18.

Still with that 1 Timothy 2:4 misuse. But you are also looking backwards at this matter. God doesn't bar anyone from being saved. ALL who ever lived or will live are before being born again enemies of God and condemned. That is the default state of being. It is not by barring anyone from being saved that men are condemned. It is by plain mercy that any are born again.

Calvin, not me, believes that everything goes according to God's predetermined plan - so to him God's will is assessed not by what scripture says, but by what happens. Jesus lamented in Jerusalem over their impending judgement (Matthew 23:37-39). The destruction was caused by the leaders rejecting Jesus - it was not caused by God's planning based upon Christ's lamentation.

Calvin got that, if he got it like I did, from Scripture and from the simple logic of pervasive causality. There is no such thing as causation by 'chance' —the notion is self-contradictory— but that is what you invoke with uncaused freewill.

 

[QvQ]

We are both thinkers and I was somewhat neurotic. When I first became a Christian, it took an embarrassingly long time to sort things out so that they finally made sense in my head.

I became a Christian because it was true and real to me. I studied many different religions, philosophies and it was a soup in my mind.
When I started matching "quotes" and stories to what was actually happening, the quotes and stories, the answers to "what is that or what is going on here" were invariably the Bible.
It is the work of the Holy Spirit.
We have reason and limited Free Will to negotiate. It is like gravity, I can decide to walk across the room by my own free will or not, subject to the laws and will of gravity, but I cannot levitate myself or do anything outside the absolute power and laws of gravity.
Our will is subject to the Absolute Will of God, but within that Will, we have, at least the illusion, of limited free will
JMHO

 

[Clare73]

I became a Christian because it was true and real to me. I studied many different religions, philosophies and it was a soup in my mind.
When I started matching "quotes" and stories to what was actually happening, the quotes and stories, the answers to "what is that or what is going on here" were invariably the Bible. It takes time to sort it all out but it is the work of the Holy Spirit.
We have reason and limited Free Will to negotiate. It is like gravity, I can decide to walk across the room by my own free will or not, subject to the laws and will of gravity, but I cannot levitate myself or do anything outside the absolute power and laws of gravity.
Our will is subject to the Absolute Will of God, but within that Will, we have, at least the illusion, of limited free will
JMHO

Seems he brings us in according to our proclivities.

 

[All Becomes New]

Why is God's primary attribute love? I don't think this has anything to do with Calvinism.

 

[John Mullally]

That's circular. God changes their will to willingness only if they are first willing?

Its willing to want to change. That's what Ezekiel 18 demonstrates. Its seen with treating addiction.

James 4:8 Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.​

I don't decide anything by what Calvin says. I don't even know what he says, never read more than a paragraph or two of his. My theology is not his, except by resemblance.

I thought it best to reference Calvin. Point out where I make points you disagree with.

I believe we do have true decision making. But I also believe it is caused.

We mean something different by "true decision making" - as I don't see everything pre-determined and I believe God allows our decisions to go in a different direction than what He desires. For example, I don't think God intended Jonah to flee from his assignment. God is not schizophrenic - He didn't command His prophet to do one thing after pre-determined that he will do the opposite.

Still depending on 1 Timothy 2:4? You have yet to show me how that verse means absolutely all people who ever lived or will live.

From the clear writing style and surrounding passages there is every reason to believe that the passage means all people who ever lived or will live.

Still with that 1 Timothy 2:4 misuse. But you are also looking backwards at this matter. God doesn't bar anyone from being saved. ALL who ever lived or will live are before being born again enemies of God and condemned. That is the default state of being. It is not by barring anyone from being saved that men are condemned. It is by plain mercy that any are born again.

1 Timothy 2:4 throws a wrench into Calvinist doctrine like nothing else.

Calvin got that, if he got it like I did, from Scripture and from the simple logic of pervasive causality. There is no such thing as causation by 'chance' —the notion is self-contradictory— but that is what you invoke with uncaused freewill.

I don't see the value in meditating on determinism. Much behavior is rooted in what our minds dwell on, which we can channel constructively using wisdom from scripture.

Not only are things not all pre-determined, Jesus shows that God's will is not being done on earth at this time. Jesus would not command His disciples to pray "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" if that statement itself was not God's will. Note that be is in the present tense. Yet, God's will is not being done on earth as it is heaven as there is no sin, sickness, and death in heaven.

 

[Clare73]

Why is God's primary attribute love? I don't think this has anything to do with Calvinism.

I would say it is justice, because his love must first satisfy his justice.
His Son had to die so that he could have mercy on us.

His justice has to satisfy only justice.

 

[Clare73]

That's what Ezekiel 18 demonstrates. Its seen with treating addiction.

James 4:8 Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.​

I thought it best to reference Calvin. Point out where I make points you disagree with.
We mean something different by "true decision making" - as I don't see everything pre-determined and I believe God allows our decisions to go in a different direction than what He desires. For example, I don't think God intended Jonah to flee from his assignment. God is not schizophrenic - He didn't command His prophet to do one thing after pre-determined that he will do the opposite.
From the clear writing style and surrounding passages there is every reason to believe that the passage means all people who ever lived or will live.

1 Timothy 2:4 throws a wrench into Calvinist doctrine like nothing else.

Not in the light of Deuteronomy 29:29.

No more than Exodus 4:21 ("I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.")
throws a wrench in Exodus 4:23 ("Say to Pharaoh, 'Let my son (Israel) go, so he may serve me.' "

I don't see the value in meditating on determinism. Much behavior is rooted in what our minds dwell on, which we can channel constructively using wisdom from scripture.

 

[QvQ]

Why is God's primary attribute love? I don't think this has anything to do with Calvinism.

Divine Simplicity
"God is thus in some sense identical to each of his attributes, which implies that each attribute is identical to every other one."
"As identical to each of his attributes, God is identical to his nature. And since his nature or essence is identical to his existence, God is identical to his existence. This is the doctrine of divine simplicity"

Divine Simplicity is a core theological understanding in Aquinas, Augustine, Luther, Calvin. It is worth research and understanding.
God's attributes, essence and existence are one.

 

[John Mullally]

.

 

[John Mullally]

1 Timothy 2:4 throws a wrench into Calvinist doctrine like nothing else.

Not in the light of Deuteronomy 29:29.

No more than Exodus 4:21 ("I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.") throws a wrench in Exodus 4:23 ("Say to Pharaoh, 'Let my son (Israel) go, so he may serve me.' "

You should avail yourself of internet resources where John MacArthur and John Piper wrestle specifically with 1 Timothy 2:4 - its quite the dance.

 

[zoidar]

Think of forgiveness by faith in Jesus' sacrifice as we think of grace.

God's grace is infinite, as are the merits of the divine Son of God's personal sacrificial death but, like grace, that has absolutely no bearing on anything apart from God's will that it have bearing upon.

I don't understand what you mean.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark Quayle said: ↑
That's circular. God changes their will to willingness only if they are first willing?

Its willing to want to change. That's what Ezekiel 18 demonstrates. Its seen with treating addiction.

James 4:8 Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.

Haha, Willy Wonka's got nothing to do with this! So the willingness to want to change is the willing that God is waiting for so that he can change their will to willingness? Where is that in the Bible? James 4:8 isn't talking to the lost, but "brothers and sisters", so it isn't about salvation. Again, how does the lost get the willingness to allow God to change their will?

I thought it best to reference Calvin. Point out where I make points you disagree with.

It sounded to me like you were saying that I believe what I do because Calvin did.

We mean something different by "true decision making" - as I don't see everything pre-determined and I believe God allows our decisions to go in a different direction than what He desires. For example, I don't think God intended Jonah to flee from his assignment. God is not schizophrenic - He didn't command His prophet to do one thing after pre-determined that he will do the opposite.

Yes, obviously we see something different by "true decision making". You conflate "God desires" with "God decrees, plans, sovereignly wills". God has given us his will two ways: 1. His revealed will, or his command; 2. His hidden will, his plan.

Of course his command can be disobeyed! How is him telling us to do something, fully knowing we won't, going to change his plan? We do the same thing with our kids; how much more can God, whose plan does not change, who knows the end from the beginning, tell us what to do, knowing whether we will or not —in fact, planning for it to be what it will end up being!

From the clear writing style and surrounding passages there is every reason to believe that the passage means all people who ever lived or will live.
1 Timothy 2:4 throws a wrench into Calvinist doctrine like nothing else.

Only if one interprets it, rather illogically, to mean that God had hopes, even plans, (but we messed that up for him) that absolutely everyone who ever lived or will live will be saved.

Anyhow, I see several different ways it could be taken, and two of which are no different from our common talk. The verse does not defeat Calvinist doctrine, but rather, upholds it, and, it also makes good logical sense, unlike your use of it. Here is one of the well exegeted uses of it: 1 Timothy 2:4 - An Exegesis - Alpha and Omega Ministries (aomin.org)

I don't see the value in meditating on determinism. Much behavior is rooted in what our minds dwell on, which we can channel constructively using wisdom from scripture.

Depends on what one means by determinism. To one person it implies that God's purpose in creating the ultimately condemned was only, or at least primarily, to condemn them (which is obviously false). To me it only means that God has determined (caused) all things. To meditate on what God has done, his wondrous works, his wisdom, his authority, his mercy, love and grace toward helpless and rebellious sinners deserving of Hell, (All of those things are inherent in Christian Determinism.) is "wisdom [directly] from scripture", and worthy ("constructive", as you say) for the mind to dwell on. In fact, even the condemnation of the reprobate is worth thinking about, as Romans 9 implies, for our understanding of the Purity, Holiness and Justice and Glory of God.