What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[Jeff Saunders]

And. . .God's love must be understood through Scripture, rather than according to fallen man's notions, which measures everything by itself.

Precisely. . .and there is a lot of "understanding" of God's love based in human notions rather than in the revealed Biblical notions, the first being that God's love (mercy) is governed by his justice.

I think you miss understand what Gods love is , it’s his essence it is who He is all other things must be understood through His love . His love is not mercy but because He is love He has mercy, just like His justice,wrath, ect all are expressions of his love because God can do nothing that is not a loving act. I believe most Christians today are doing the same thing that the Jews did before Jesus came , they had much scripture memorized and made a whole system based on what they thought God was like but when God shows up He says they did not know Him, Jesus said you search the scripture for you think you will find life but life is in me. The Jews thought they were obedient to God no different than many people today but I think too many do not know the Fathers heart and so have made a system that is far from the heart of God.

 

[Mark Quayle]

The fact is God never ordained it to happen as calvinism teaches. These passages refute meticulous determinism.

None of us is privy to all the facts. Who can say how God created and what the implications are concerning predestination and determinism? I certainly can't. But I CAN see logic and I can read Scripture. I like to see both applied to anything I am considering, though obviously Scripture must trump my logic.

Logic demands First Cause as the beginning of all things, as does Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. According to the Law of Causation, which both science and reason affirm as binding and pervasive, and which John 1:3 affirms, God caused all subsequent things. By a long-chain of cause-and-effect, then, even a deistic God is the beginning cause of absolutely everything, unless it can be shown that there is such a thing as causation by chance (which is logically self-contradictory). This, your verses do not deny.

Your claim is that meticulous determinism is refuted. Either (it seems to me) you hold a foggy notion of cause-and-effect in your mind, in favor of your distaste for God causing 'bad' things like sin and suffering, which foggy notion you maintain as instructive of Scripture interpretation, or you disdain the Biblical and Logical idea of God's absolute mastery and immanence, likewise a bow to your distaste of the idea that God caused 'bad' things. Then you go so far as to claim to know what is actually bad, and unchangeable by God's glory and power. You have to construct a framework over which God had no power: Free Will. No, I'm sorry, I mean, a framework that God has no wish to override, since he 'honors' our free agency so.

I suppose I should admit to the idea that it is mere human thinking that makes a 'plain reading' of your verses prove that God does not determine all things, specially since modern man assumes some things as certain and natural in his mind when attempting at logical progression, and see no need to reference or deal with them. (I don't think it has always been so. At one time, at least, man apparently thought more along the lines that the Gods were selfish and man's life was, as a result, about the Gods and not about man. Other superstitious notions no doubt also contributed, such as determination by The Fates.) But whatever, this life is NOT about us, but about God. We are not endowed with much natural wisdom concerning spiritual things nor, specially, with knowledge and understanding of God's economy. I think we've already been through why I don't think your plain reading is accurate —that God does indeed use our concepts and our language and even some of our presumptions that this is about us, and that our point of view is accurate enough, in order for us to consider presented options from which to choose. But, we are not yet gods, haha.

I really would like to see you show me how it is logically possible that First Cause did not cause something, anything, whatever you want to pick out.

 

[misput]

I finally figured it out what some of you guys are saying:
God created Adam innocent, free of sin, but knowing he would sin. Therefore because Adam did sin, He imputed sin to all mankind which brought physical suffering and death to all and also decreed all mankind would inherit a sinful, fallen, fleshly nature at conception which would cause all to commit actual sin and become separated from Him, unable to return except for the few He chooses from their zombie like state of sin, leaving the rest to suffer an eternity in Hell fire. Sounds a bit like a Stephen King horror novel.

 

[Mark Quayle]

It is not a choice if God chose it for them. That is playing with words. Without the ability to choose, it is not choosing. I deny that the reason people choose to reject God is because God chose that for them. This is not the same as turning someone over to a reprobate mind, which can happen.

No sir. You are letting words play with your mind. Not only do I not say God chose it FOR them, as if he substituted his choice for theirs, but I do say that if God ordains that they choose as they do, it is still them choosing. God chose who would be the members of the Bride. In fact, he made them for that purpose. That does not mean they do not also choose. And who chose first is irrelevant as to whether indeed they do or do not choose.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark Quayle said: ↑
If you want to go there, (that "responsibility lies in who is the reason to will something" (my emphasis)) —from point of view of the sinner, we are that 'who', and not God.

From the sinner? What I think matters here is what is objectively true.

Of course. But the point I was making is that the sinner places himself as that WHO. We believers also, by habit and philosophy, not to mention by 'the old man', do that too often. God should be the reason to will something, and thus, 'freewill' and specific predestination of all things, work together, in what God calls being truly free. (Which, by the way, is still not the 'freewill' that some preach, where we are somehow truly spontaneous and or decisions are not caused. God is the only truly spontaneous, and uncaused.)

 

[Clare73]

I think you miss understand what Gods love is , it’s his essence it is who He is all other things must be understood through His love .

Who made that unBiblical rule?

God's justice is his governing attribute, all his attributes are in accordance with his justice, including his love.

His love is not mercy but because He is love He has mercy,

His love is the source of his mercy, which mercy is according to justice.

just like His justice,wrath, ect all are expressions of his love

His wrath is not an expression of his love, it is an expression of his just judgment.

because God can do nothing that is not a loving act.

Who made that rule?

Condemnation (Romans 5:18) is not a loving act to those who are condemned.

I believe most Christians today are doing the same thing that the Jews did before Jesus came,

Actually, Christians today are doing something totally different, judging God by their own lights, creating God in their own image, according to their own Biblically-uninformed notions, assuming he is like them, just better and perfect.

they had much scripture memorized and made a whole system based on what they thought God was like but when God shows up He says they did not know Him,

It was not about their memorizing Scripture, it was about their leaders rejecting the Messiah and teaching them to do so because they did not want to lose their religious power.

Jesus said you search the scripture for you think you will find life but life is in me. The Jews thought they were obedient to God no different than many people today but I think too many do not know the Fathers heart and so have made a system that is far from the heart of God.

The heart of God is revealed in Scripture, whereas "Christians today" take it from their own human notions, having little understanding of the vast difference between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of man concerning him.

The Father's heart is subject to his justice.

All God's actions are governed by justice, which is why Jesus had to go to the cross in order for God to remit our sin because, in order to be a just God, he could not remit our sin unless it was paid for, so he himself provided the payment (Romans 3:25) which satisfied his own justice--the sacrifice of his One and Only Son as atonement.

That is divine love. . .paying the horrible price his own justice required.

That's what the love of God looks like.

 

[Clare73]

I finally figured it out what some of you guys are saying:
God created Adam innocent, free of sin, but knowing he would sin. Therefore because Adam did sin, He imputed sin to all mankind which brought physical suffering and death to all and also decreed all mankind would inherit a sinful, fallen, fleshly nature at conception which would cause all to commit actual sin and become separated from Him, unable to return except for the few He chooses from their zombie like state of sin, leaving the rest to suffer an eternity in Hell fire. Sounds a bit like a Stephen King horror novel.

Judging God by your human notions, rather that Biblical revelation.

If you ever stood before the justice of God, you would think Stephen King was a lullaby.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

You are making your arguments based on the times we are living in and that you assume that everyone has had the gospel to respond to. What about all those people who lived after Jesus died on the cross and never heard? The New Testament was not even written till years after Jesus died what about all those people? Look at the big picture not just what we think today.

Luke's Gospel was written while most of the eye witnesses of the life and death of Jesus were still alive. Many of the early letters of Paul were distributed around the churches during the time he was actually visiting and planting churches. Just because the different elements of the New Testament was gathered together to form the start of a canon was not until the 2nd Century, it doesn't mean that the original written Gospel wasn't circulated much earlier while many who witnessed the death and resurrection of Christ were still alive.

 

[Greg Cheney]

No sir. You are letting words play with your mind. Not only do I not say God chose it FOR them, as if he substituted his choice for theirs, but I do say that if God ordains that they choose as they do, it is still them choosing. God chose who would be the members of the Bride. In fact, he made them for that purpose. That does not mean they do not also choose. And who chose first is irrelevant as to whether indeed they do or do not choose.

No, you are playing with words. You can say they chose, but you have God causing them to choose. That is force, which I know you are fine with. It is not free will unless they originate their own choices.

 

[Clare73]

No, you don't say what it means by "the kingdom of God".

True. . .I thought you were asking about the verb, "see," rather than the object, "the kingdom of God."

The kingdom of God is the divine spiritual realm which the unregenerate man cannot see, where God's rule is acknowledged, the sphere in which men submit voluntarily to his rule. . .which would be in the hearts of believers and in the church.

The unregenerate cannot understand, or believe, what "kingdom of God" means; i.e., John 1:4,

 

[Clare73]

No, you are playing with words. You can say they chose, but you have God causing them to choose. That is force, which I know you are fine with. It is not free will unless they originate their own choices.

No sir, it is not force.

Free will is the ability to choose voluntarily, without external force or constraint, what one prefers, likes.

However, the will does not operate in a vacuum. The will is governed by the disposition--what one prefers, likes.

God works in the disposition, giving one to prefer his will, which one then freely and willingly chooses.

God does not violate free will, God uses their free will to bring men to himself (John 6:65).

There is no force involved, all is voluntarily chosen. . .the meaning of "free will."

 

[zoidar]

No sir, it is not.

Free will is the ability to choose voluntarily, without external force or constraint, what one prefers, likes.

However, the will does not operate in a vacuum. The will is governed by the disposition--what one prefers, likes.

God works in the disposition, giving one to prefer his will, which one then freely and willingly chooses.

God does not violate free will, God uses their free will to bring men to himself (John 6:65).

There is no force involved, all is voluntarily chosen. . .the meaning of "free will."

Even if truly free will doesn't exist we still need to repent before regeneration.

 

[QvQ]

It is not free will unless they originate their own choices

The way I see it, a person cannot originate their own choices. All choices, all possibilities are within the Will of God. With God, all things are possible. What is impossible to man, is possible to God.
God may or may not actualize all possibilities but all possibilities exist within God's Will. God is omnipotent.
We are given a limited number of possibilities to choose from and all our choices are conditional.
For instance, if I were trying to find a house, that is my will. There are a small number of houses available to choose from, based on location, available for sale, what I can afford.
My will to house is limited, conditional and unfree even though I have a will, it is limited by the possibilities.
That is what is meant by "limited free will." That concept is in the Westminster Confessional although it has a slightly different meaning.
A person does not have free will because he cannot create any number of possibilities and he does not have the power to actualize any more than a very small set of conditional possibilities at any one time. Only God has Free Will.

 

[zoidar]

We are given a limited number of possibilities to choose from and all our choices are conditional.
For instance, if I were trying to find a house, that is my will. There are a small number of houses available to choose from, based on location, available for sale, what I can afford.
My will to house is limited, conditional and unfree even though I have a will, it is limited by the possibilities.

Sounds a lot like my own thoughts.

 

[Clare73]

Even if truly free will doesn't exist we still need to repent before regeneration.

Just as in your natural birth, so in your spiritual rebirth (on which the natural is patterned), you have nothing to do with re-birth (regeneration) according to John 3:3-8 following, from post #2369:

"No one can see (eidon--know, be acquainted with) the kingdom of God until he is born again. . .
No one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water (cleanness, righteousness of Christ) and the Spirit. . .
You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'
The wind blows wherever it pleases.
You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going.
So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

There is your sequence, regeneration comes before everything else.
One is spiritually blind until the rebirth.

How much power does the plain word of God have with you?
We all get to decide whether to believe the NT or not.

 

[zoidar]

Just as in your natural birth, so in your spiritual rebirth (on which the natural is patterned), you have nothing to do with re-birth (regeneration) according to John 3:3-8 following, from post #2369:

"No one can see (eidon--know, be acquainted with) the kingdom of God until he is born again. . .
No one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water (cleanness, righteousness of Christ) and the Spirit. . .
You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'
The wind blows wherever it pleases.
You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going.
So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

There is your sequence, regeneration comes before everything else.
One is spiritually blind until the rebirth.

And we all get to decide whether to believe the NT or not.

I think it's hard to make too much theology out of John 3:1-8. I know you are trying hard to do that, but it comes with a lot of assumptions.

I for one believe you can't see the kingdom of God unless you have repented and thereby been born again by the Spirit.

"Enter the kingdom of God" might refer to heaven.

"Born of water" might be baptism.

 

[Clare73]

.

 

[misput]

I finally figured out what some of you guys are saying: God created Adam innocent, free of sin, but knowing he would sin. Therefore because Adam did sin, He imputed sin to all mankind which brought physical suffering and death to all and also decreed all mankind would inherit a sinful, fallen, fleshly nature at conception which would cause all to commit actual sin and become separated from Him, unable to return except for the few He chooses from their zombie like state of sin, leaving the rest to suffer an eternity in Hell fire. Sounds a bit like a Stephen King horror novel.

Judging God by your human notions, rather that Biblical revelation.

I primarily got the above from you. What did you/we get wrong?

 

[Clare73]

I think it's hard to make too much theology out of John 3:1-8. I know you are trying hard to do that, but it comes with a lot of assumptions.

I for one believe you can't see the kingdom of God unless you have
repented and thereby been born again by the Spirit.

Now if you could just get Jesus to agree with that in John 3:3-8.

You have nothing to do with the rebirth of your spirit, any more than you have to do with the birth of your body.

Repentance is part of the divine spiritual realm; i.e., the kingdom of God, and always follows the rebirth, which rebirth Jesus plainly presents as necessarily coming first, therefore, repentance is the kingdom of God.

"Enter the kingdom of God" might refer to heaven.

There is one kingdom in the NT, variously described as Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven, Kingdom of the Father, Kingdom of the Son of Man, Kingdom of Christ and God, Kingdom of Jesus, Kingdom of our Lord and his Christ, Kingdom of the Son and his love.

We are reigning in the heavenly kingdom now (Ephesians 1:20-23, Ephesians 2:6).

"Born of water" might be baptism.

Baptism symbolizes the cleansing, the righteousness of regeneration.

 

[Clare73]

I finally figured out what some of you guys are saying: God created Adam innocent, free of sin, but knowing he would sin. Therefore because Adam did sin, He imputed sin to all mankind which brought physical suffering and death to all and also decreed all mankind would inherit a sinful, fallen, fleshly nature at conception which would cause all to commit actual sin and become separated from Him, unable to return except for the few He chooses from their zombie like state of sin, leaving the rest to suffer an eternity in Hell fire. Sounds a bit like a Stephen King horror novel.

I primarily got the above from you. What did you/we get wrong?

What's this "we," white man? (Tonto to Lone Ranger as the Indians are coming over the hill and the Lone Ranger asks Tonto, "What are we going to do?")

Don't blame me for your calling God's revelation a Stephen King horror novel.