What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[RickReads]

Now... Since OT saints will not be the Bride of Christ? They are the friend of the Groom. Clare and company will have to say Jesus did not predestine the likes of Moses, etc. For they were not chosen IN Christ to be His Bride. It gets messy when that kind of thinking is dogmatized and finally hits a wall of light. God's Word is light.

That's a really interesting belief. Please share the scripture that supports your opinion.

 

[zoidar]

According to John 3:3-8, you must be born again to even see, much less do, anything spiritual.

Do you believe one can see the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit?

 

[Clare73]

Yet... Jesus died for all.
Why do you keep trying to shirk your responsibility on this matter? Being a workman needing not to be ashamed?
Who cares how else the word can be used in a different context? What are you trying to prove?
Well.... For whom did Jesus die for? You tell me, please.

I think "for whom" is an irrelevant distraction in the atonement, when the operative matter is "to whom" it is applied.

 

[Clare73]

Gene Z did you check out psalms 22? where David is saying God did not forsake Jesus, I think it is down about verse 24.

PS: Clare and others believe Christ died only for those He predestined before the world began by causing them to want to be saved and the rest by causing them not to desire Him. I guess that is what they mean by second cause.

You misrepresent. . .is it intentional?

I'm beginning to understand why people reject "Calvinism," I would also if it were what they claim Calvin wrote.

They're operating off second-, third- and fourth-hand misinformation.

 

[Clare73]

Although God provided for all through Christ's ransom (as previously quoted in 1 Tim 2:6),

So there's unused money left on the table. . .for whom? . . .don't think so.

The God of the Bible is not that sloppy, he is perfect and precise to the last detail (Matthew 10:30), "even the very hairs of your head are numbered."

 

[Clare73]

Ps 22:24 as I read it does not indicate what you stated. Matter of fact, I could not find anything like that in Ps 22. Mind finding it, and copy and paste it, so I can see what I am missing, please?
As for being predestined? Yes.. We were chosen IN Him (Ephesians 1:4).
In Him? Just like the woman was in Adam before she was to be revealed. As Eve became bone

of Adam's bones and flesh of his flesh? So are we going to be when He gives us a resurrection body just like his own glorious heavenly body. Right now we are hidden in Christ awaiting our resurrection body.
Now... Since OT saints will not be the Bride of Christ. They are the friend of the Groom.

That is nowhere is NT apostolic teaching. . .

Clare and company will have to say Jesus did not predestine the likes of Moses, etc. For they were not chosen IN Christ to be His Bride. It gets messy when that kind of thinking is dogmatized and finally hits a wall of light. God's Word is light.

That is pure cockamania. . .

Thank God for his NT apostolic teaching, which presents no such thing!

That is derived from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8), which interpretation contradicts authoritative NT apostolic teaching.

 

[John Mullally]

So there's unused money left on the table. . .for whom? . . .don't think so.

The NT shows God's provision is received by faith as I explained earlier in detail. Its not my issue if what is proclaimed in scripture does not align to your accounting system.

Mark 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
​

The God of the Bible is not that sloppy, he is perfect and precise to the last detail (Matthew 10:30), "even the very hairs of your head are numbered."

Scripture is not always that concrete. Sometimes Jesus and Paul speak in highly abstract terms like John 6:53.

Sometimes Calvinists like yourself make their case by selective interpretation of those highly abstract passages (like John 3:3-8). I try to avoid that strategy.

 

[Clare73]

Do you believe one can see the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit?

Previously addressed. I repeat:

I believe John 3:3: No one can see (know, be acquainted with) the kingdom of God apart from rebirth by the Holy Spirit.

I believe John 3:5: No one can enter the kingdom God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

I'll leave the parsing to you.

 

[zoidar]

Previously addressed. I repeat:

I believe John 3:3: No one can see (know, be acquainted with) the kingdom of God apart from rebirth by the Holy Spirit.

I believe John 3:5: No one can enter the kingdom God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

I'll leave the parsing to you.

You didn't understand my question. I will try again.

If both the one who sees the kingdom of God and the one entered the kingdom of God are born of Spirit and water. What is then the difference between the two? Why is it that one of them just see the kingdom, but the other one has entered it?

 

[Clare73]

The NT shows God's provision that is received by faith as I explained earlier in detail. Its not my issue if what is proclaimed in scripture does not align to your accounting system.

Or the use of a word not understood correctly in light of the whole counsel of God, thereby yields payment twice for the same sin, which is contrary to God's exacting justice.

 

[Clare73]

You didn't understand my question. I will try again.

If both the one who sees the kingdom of God and the one entered the kingdom of God are born of Spirit and water. What is then the difference between the two?
Why is it that one of them just see the kingdom, but the other one has entered it?

They are one and the same.

If you see it, you will enter it. . .sight is given only to those who shall enter.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Ps 22:24 as I read it does not indicate what you stated. Matter of fact, I could not find anything like that in Ps 22. Mind finding it, and copy and paste it, so I can see what I am missing, please?

As for being predestined? Yes.. We were chosen IN Him (Ephesians 1:4).

In Him? Just like the woman was in Adam before she was to be revealed. As Eve became bone of Adam's bones and flesh of his flesh? So are we going to be when He gives us a resurrection body just like his own glorious heavenly body. Right now we are hidden in Christ awaiting our resurrection body.

Now... Since OT saints will not be the Bride of Christ? They are the friend of the Groom. Clare and company will have to say Jesus did not predestine the likes of Moses, etc. For they were not chosen IN Christ to be His Bride. It gets messy when that kind of thinking is dogmatized and finally hits a wall of light. God's Word is light.

Maybe he means Psalm 16:10

 

[John Mullally]

Or if the use of a word is not understood correctly in light of the whole counsel of God, thereby yielding payment twice for the same sin, which is contrary to God's exacting justice.

You speak of "in light of the whole counsel of God". You were not there. God is not bound to YOUR accounting system. The payment is provided for all but only received by faith (see post 3078)

 

[zoidar]

They are one and the same.

If you see it, you will enter it. . .sight is given only to those who shall enter.

If they are one and the same the one seeing the kingdom of God has already entered it.

But you say shall enter it... that points to time. So what is the difference between the one that has seen the kingdom, but not yet entered it and the one that has both seen and entered it?

 

[Clare73]

You speak of "in light of the whole counsel of God". You were not there. God is not bound to YOUR accounting system. In receiving by faith (see Post 3078), the payment is provided but only received by faith.

God is bound to his own exacting justice. . .or Christ would not have had to die so that God could forgive men.

Does not address the issue you create of being contrary to God's exacting justice.

 

[Clare73]

If they are one and the same the one seeing the kingdom of God has already entered it.

But you say shall enter it... that points to time. So what is the difference between the one that has seen the kingdom, but not yet entered it and the one that has both seen and entered it?

Kind of obvious, don't you think?

It is a process, which in the human realm involves time.

 

[John Mullally]

God is bound to his own exacting justice. . .or Christ would not have had to die so that God could forgive men..

No disagreement there.

Does not address the issue you create of being contrary to God's exacting justice.

Make an actual argument instead of a vague accusation.

 

[zoidar]

Kind of obvious, don't you think?

It is a process, which in the human realm involves time.

It's not obvious to me, at least not how you guys think about it.

Is the one that is seeing the kingdom of God but has not yet entered it saved? Or is he saved first when he enters it?

 

[Mark Quayle]

A couple of times when people came to Jesus for healing, He turned it back on them saying: "Be it done to you according to your faith" and "all things are possible to him who believes" - I believe to provoke a more positive faith response from them. In other cases, he commended them with "your faith has made you whole", "your faith has saved you", "I have not seen such great faith in all of Israel", etc. Receiving from God requires faith.

In Nazareth (Mark 6:1-6), Jesus marveled at their unbelief (cause) which resulted in He could do no mighty works (effect).

So you are claiming that their unbelief meant that God CAN'T do something? Or do you admit that, perhaps, their unbelief meant that God prohibited Christ from performing miracles there?

These passages are not new to me. I've never seen them disprove any of my doctrines.

 

[Clare73]

No disagreement there.
Make an actual argument instead of a vague accusation.

Explain what you find vague regarding your argument: requiring payment twice for the same sin being a violation of God's exacting justice.