What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[Jesus is YHWH]

Water, air and light are also in the pagan religions. . .did they also come from the pagan religions?

typical bait n switch and calvin was a disciple of Augustine, he studied his work and idolized the man.

The consensus view asserts Augustine developed his later doctrines ca. 396 CE while writing Ad Simplicianum as a result of studying scripture. His early De libero arbitrio argued for traditional free choice refuting Manichaean determinism, but his anti-Pelagian writings rejected any human ability to believe without God giving faith. Kenneth M. Wilson's study is the first work applying the comprehensive methodology of reading systematically and chronologically through Augustine's entire extant corpus (works, sermons, and letters 386-430 CE), and examining his doctrinal development. The author explores Augustine's later theology within the prior philosophical-religious context of free choice versus deterministic arguments. This analysis demonstrates Augustine persisted in traditional views until 412 CE and his theological transition was primarily due to his prior Stoic, Neoplatonic, and Manichaean influences.

Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to 'non-Free Free Will': A Comprehensive Methodology

 

[Clare73]

Yes, we can choose to live sin free our self but this is where sin comes in,
we find out we cannot,

"Choice," in the sense of "free will," means the power/ability to execute the choice.
If you don't have the power to "do" it, then you can't really "choose" it.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Gods grace is resistible,

God is resistible as we read in both Testaments below.

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

Since all men are not saved and Gids grace goes out to all men, Gods grace can be resisted.

Acts 7:51
“You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

God the Holy Spirit can be resisted.

Hebrews 10:29
How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

Here we see the Spirit of grace resisted, insulted, rejected and trampled under.

Hebrews 6:4-8
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.


Here we have those receiving Gods grace sharing in the Holy Spirit of grace reject it. They have fallen away permanently from His grace and can no longer repent.

Psalm 78:17;40
But they continued to sin against Him, rebelling in the desert against the Most High. How often they disobeyed Him in the wilderness and grieved Him in the desert!

Here we see them in the wilderness rejecting Gods grace upon them and grieving God in the process.

conclusion: just 1 passage showing God can be resisted is enough to prove it is true. But as we see there are plenty of passages which prove man can resist God.

The " I " in tulip is false teaching.

Listen to the Calvinist Lorrain Boettner.

Loraine Boettner has stated on p. 59 of his book, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination,

"prove any one of them true and all of the others will follow as logical and necessary parts of the system. Prove any one of them false and the whole system must be abandoned."

1)I have already proven irresistible grace is not true with Acts 7:51
2)I have proven the atonement is not limited- John 1:20, 3:16, 1 Tim 2:4-6, 2 Pet 3:9 and 1 John 2:2
3)I have proven that election is not unconditional- whosever will may come, that means all, everyone from numerous passages . John 1:12 John 3:16

hope this helps !!!

 

[Clare73]

How do you know?

I'm taking your word for it that "Calvinism" has no good answers.

If there are good answers from the Scriptures, then everyone has them, including "Calvinism."

 

[Clare73]

neither is tulip and meticulous determinism

There is no TULIP nor "meticulous determinism" in the writings of Calvin.

 

[Clare73]

typical bait n switch

Typical false analogy. . .

and calvin was a disciple of Augustine, he studied his work and idolized the man.

The consensus view asserts Augustine developed his later doctrines ca. 396 CE while writing Ad Simplicianum as a result of studying scripture. His early De libero arbitrio argued for traditional free choice refuting Manichaean determinism, but his anti-Pelagian writings rejected any human ability to believe without God giving faith. Kenneth M. Wilson's study is the first work applying the comprehensive methodology of reading systematically and chronologically through Augustine's entire extant corpus (works, sermons, and letters 386-430 CE), and examining his doctrinal development. The author explores Augustine's later theology within the prior philosophical-religious context of free choice versus deterministic arguments. This analysis demonstrates Augustine persisted in traditional views until 412 CE and his theological transition was primarily due to his prior Stoic, Neoplatonic, and Manichaean influences.

Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to 'non-Free Free Will': A Comprehensive Methodology

Please show your Biblical points from Scripture, rather than what others say.

 

[trophy33]

I'm taking your word for it that "Calvinism" has no good answers.
If there are good answers from the Scriptures, then everyone has them, including "Calvinism."

I do not think your posts directed at me are meaningfully related to mine, so I will let it be.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Typical false analogy. . .

Please show your Biblical points from Scripture, rather than what others say.

I did here and every other post in this thread I started. How long have you been a calvinist? how many years ?

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/what-is-wrong-with-calvinism.8248320/page

 

[Clare73]

I did here and every other post in this thread I started. How long have you been a calvinist? how many years ?

The same number of years since you gave up beating animals.

I don't do "isms."

I've been a "Paulist" from the beginning, what I do know about Calvin does not agree with your assertions regarding him.

 

[Clare73]

.

 

[Der Alte]

When I first heard the Calvinist proof text about a leopard not being able to change his spots, nor the Ethiopian his skin, I needed to see the context. I found that God was speaking to the king and queen of Israel not, necessarily all of mankind, Jer 13:18. And as I read further in this chapter I found another passage, which refutes Calvinism.
Does God predestine some part of humanity to salvation and another part to damnation and there is nothing either group can do about it? Many arguments have been presented in support of this.
Note this passage from Jeremiah. God said “I have caused to cleave” That word is הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi. It is in the perfect or completed sense. God’s express will, clearly stated, for the whole house of Israel and Judah, to cling to God as a belt clings to a man’s waist.
It was done, finished, completed, in God’s sight, and, according to some arguments, nothing man can do will cause God’s will to not be done. But they, Israel and Judah, would not hear and obey, their will, vs. God’s will, So God destroyed them, vs. 14.
…..This passage very much speaks to God’s sovereign will, and man’s free will and agency. God stated very clearly what His will was, in terms that cannot be misunderstood. But, because the Israelites and Judeans would not hear, and obey, God destroyed them, instead of them being unto God, “for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory, vs. 10.”

Jer 13:1 Thus saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee a linen girdle, and put it upon thy loins, and put it not in water.
2 So I got a girdle according to the word of the LORD, and put it on my loins.
3 And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying,
4 Take the girdle that thou hast got, which is upon thy loins, and arise, go to Euphrates, and hide it there in a hole of the rock.
5 So I went, and hid it by Euphrates, as the LORD commanded me.
6 And it came to pass after many days, that the LORD said unto me, Arise, go to Euphrates, and take the girdle from thence, which I commanded thee to hide there.
7 Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
8 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
9 Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.
10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.
11 For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave [הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi] unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.

· · ·
14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.​

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

When I first heard the Calvinist proof text about a leopard not being able to change his spots, nor the Ethiopian his skin, I needed to see the context. I found that God was speaking to the king and queen of Israel not, necessarily all of mankind, Jer 13:18. And as I read further in this chapter I found another passage, which refutes Calvinism.
Does God predestine some part of humanity to salvation and another part to damnation and there is nothing either group can do about it? Many arguments have been presented in support of this.
Note this passage from Jeremiah. God said “I have caused to cleave” That word is הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi. It is in the perfect or completed sense. God’s express will, clearly stated, for the whole house of Israel and Judah, to cling to God as a belt clings to a man’s waist.
It was done, finished, completed, in God’s sight, and, according to some arguments, nothing man can do will cause God’s will to not be done. But they, Israel and Judah, would not hear and obey, their will, vs. God’s will, So God destroyed them, vs. 14.
…..This passage very much speaks to God’s sovereign will, and man’s free will and agency. God stated very clearly what His will was, in terms that cannot be misunderstood. But, because the Israelites and Judeans would not hear, and obey, God destroyed them, instead of them being unto God, “for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory, vs. 10.”

Jer 13:1 Thus saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee a linen girdle, and put it upon thy loins, and put it not in water.
2 So I got a girdle according to the word of the LORD, and put it on my loins.
3 And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying,
4 Take the girdle that thou hast got, which is upon thy loins, and arise, go to Euphrates, and hide it there in a hole of the rock.
5 So I went, and hid it by Euphrates, as the LORD commanded me.
6 And it came to pass after many days, that the LORD said unto me, Arise, go to Euphrates, and take the girdle from thence, which I commanded thee to hide there.
7 Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
8 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
9 Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.
10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.
11 For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave [הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi] unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.
I
· · ·
14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.​

I praise the Good Lord this ex calvinist of 40 plus years changed his spots. And the thing I thank the Lord for most is others in my personal life at work, friends, family and church family have seen the positive difference it has made in how I dialogue with people and treat them with more compassion, empathy and caring. Its been a testimony much like my original conversion in 1980. I have returned to my first love stronger than ever and scripture is alive again, learning and growing and not stuck in a box with my beliefs I filtered everything I read through that reformed lens.

 

[misput]

"Choice," in the sense of "free will," means the power/ability to execute the choice.
If you don't have the power to "do" it, then you can't really "choose" it.

That is just one definition and a miserable one at best.

 

[Clare73]

That is just one definition and a miserable one at best.

That's the way it works in philosophy, where "free will" comes from.

 

[misput]

That's the way it works in philosophy, where "free will" comes from.

Do you think God is bound by philosophy?

 

[Der Alte]

Do you think God is bound by philosophy?

It ain't about philosophy. It's about us. As far back as Joshua people were given choices.

Joshua 24:15​

(15) And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

 

[misput]

Clare, scripture seems to indicate every human being has an inborn sense of right and wrong, good and evil and their response to this is what leads them toward or away from God. What do you think?

 

[QvQ]

God is love is a primary/essential and core attribute of God.

The gnostics believed that wisdom was the primary, essential core attribute of God. But it was the lower part as God was vast beyond wisdom. The other attributes of god flowed from wisdom, creating demiurges, good and evil who had free will. While good had the power to create, the evil had the power to corrupt and destroy. The prize was wisdom. The good was protecting the light of wisdom. The evil was trying to destroy wisdom.
Man was a pawn in the game, choosing either side to decide the fate of the world.
The vast and unknowable god beyond Wisdom would eventually vanquish evil and create a new world

God is Love , then Love is God. If I substitute love for wisdom, then I am skirting very close to Gnosticism. As I am studying alone, finding my own way, reading the Bible, Aquinas, Augustine, Calvin, I try to respectfully handle the concepts presented very carefully so I am particularly aware of various doctrines and where they originated

The words “God is love” mean that love is an essential attribute of God. Love is something true of God but it is not God. It expresses the way God is in His unitary being, as do the words holiness, justice, faithfulness and truth. Because God is immutable He always acts like Himself, and because He is a unity He never suspends one of His attributes in order to exercise another.

A. W. Tozer carefully avoided gnostic theology by these few words "Love is something true of God but it is not God"

 

[zoidar]

So? . . .The concept comes from philosophy (Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, Cicero)--before the Church Fathers, not from the Bible.
Pelagius (British monk, circa 400 AD) argued for it as necessary for moral responsibility.

and so does the calvinist view of predestination, sovereignty and determinism has its origin in the pagan religions/false gods.

I wouldn't go as far as "Jesus is YHWH" did in his post, but many of Augustines ideas were drawn, if I'm not wrong, from Stoicism and Manichaeism.

"Augustine of Hippo (354–430) converted to Christianity from Manichaeism in the year 387." /Manichaeism - Wikipedia.

"Consider this article produced by Tim Warner in 2003:

Prior to the writings of Augustine, the Church universally held that mankind had a totally free will. Each man was responsible before God to accept the Gospel. His ultimate destiny, while fully dependent on God’s grace and power, was also dependent on his free choice to submit to or reject God’s grace and power. In the three centuries from the Apostles to Augustine the early Church held to NONE of the five points of Calvinism, not one. The writings of the orthodox Church, for the first three centuries, are in stark contrast to the ideas of Augustine and Calvin. Man is fully responsible for his choice to respond to or reject the Gospel. This was considered to be the Apostolic doctrine passed down through the local church elders ordained by the Apostles, and their successors."

Did the Early Church Fathers teach Calvinistic Doctrines?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Do you think God is bound by philosophy?

it appears that way with some lol