What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[Jesus is YHWH]

@Dizerner

 

[P1LGR1M]

OK. I think I am now understanding your position, but maybe not.

Correct me if I am wrong: When man responds positively to the conviction of the Holy Spirit during the preaching of the Gospel, God changes his nature (per Ezekiel 18:11 and Acts 2:38-39).

When the man or woman responds positively to the Gospel, yes, that is when the nature is changed, because those who are "dead" receive the Life Christ came to bestow upon men.

But, keep in mind that conversion is not necessarily automatic or even guaranteed. According to the many/few ratio Christ taught (as well as the implicit principle seen in Biblical History) most will reject His convicting ministry. I estimate that in my own case this ministry went on for over a year.

And to be clear, the natural man, who is dead (without the Life of Christ and incapable of understanding the spiritual things of God), is enlightened during that intervention of God.

And only in that time. I think Scripture presents the picture of God withdrawing His attempts to bring men under conviction after a certain time. Meaning that, though He is not willing any should perish He isn't going to force men to come into obedience. I believe this is true in both Old and New Testaments. And we see that it has always been God Who first reveals His will to men and then they respond. How He deals with them after that is based on their response.

That is not the modern notion of "free will." Because it is not something inherent in man, it is God giving a man or woman the ability to understand that which God is trying to communicate to them.

And per Ezekiel 36:27, only those whose nature are changed are able "to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them".

This passage, Ezekiel 36:22-27, is the clearest promise of the New Birth we have in Scripture. When God said "Get you a new heart and a new spirit" He was basically saying "Change your thinking." The heart represents the mind of man, and the spirit represents man's emotional basis, basically. Like the thoughts and intents. A man can think one thing but do the opposite. A "stiff neck and a hard heart" represent man's rebellion against revelation God has provided.

God has always tried to reveal His will to men (which was for their benefit, always), and man has always rebelled against God. Here is an example:


Acts 7:51-53
King James Version

51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.


The only difference between God (the Spirit) revealing His will to men then and His revealing His will to men now is the revelation itself. The Gospel begins in Genesis 3:15, and is given progressively as time marches on. However, understanding of the Gospel was withheld until this current Age. So today God is revealing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the hearts of men and women and the penalty for rejection becomes more severe (meaning men and women are held more accountable because the revelation is more direct (from God directly to the heart of the individual)).

As far as only those God places His Spirit in being able to walk in His statutes and Keep His judgments, I think we have to look at the Old Testament and see that men and women were justified for their obedience (even though we know that obedience was not perfect nor able to be "good" enough that they might receive Eternal Redemption). Luke 1:5-6 is a good example. So is Luke 18:10-14.

Secondly we have to distinguish between Positional Sanctification (which is the process of the believer being eternally set apart unto God) and Progressive Sanctification which is the process by which we are made holy in our daily conversation. The latter is a lifelong process which will—because of our flesh—never be completed in this lifetime.

If that is your position, we happen to agree on those points.

I hope that helps present where I stand a little better.

In Ezekiel 36:22-27 we see the New Birth promised: cleansing through the Word, a new heart (our minds are changed concerning who we are), a new spirit (our actions are changed based on our new understanding), and God's eternal Spirit taking up residence in us to lead and guide us in life.

Ezekiel 37 depicts a more Israel-specific restoration and resurrection on a National basis.

These two passages should have immediately been thought of by Nicodemus when the Lord said men must be born again. Instead—he gives it a physical context and receives rebuke.


God bless.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

When the man or woman responds positively to the Gospel, yes, that is when the nature is changed, because those who are "dead" receive the Life Christ came to bestow upon men.

But, keep in mind that conversion is not necessarily automatic or even guaranteed. According to the many/few ratio Christ taught (as well as the implicit principle seen in Biblical History) most will reject His convicting ministry. I estimate that in my own case this ministry went on for over a year.

And to be clear, the natural man, who is dead (without the Life of Christ and incapable of understanding the spiritual things of God), is enlightened during that intervention of God.

And only in that time. I think Scripture presents the picture of God withdrawing His attempts to bring men under conviction after a certain time. Meaning that, though He is not willing any should perish He isn't going to force men to come into obedience. I believe this is true in both Old and New Testaments. And we see that it has always been God Who first reveals His will to men and then they respond. How He deals with them after that is based on their response.

That is not the modern notion of "free will." Because it is not something inherent in man, it is God giving a man or woman the ability to understand that which God is trying to communicate to them.




This passage, Ezekiel 36:22-27, is the clearest promise of the New Birth we have in Scripture. When God said "Get you a new heart and a new spirit" He was basically saying "Change your thinking." The heart represents the mind of man, and the spirit represents man's emotional basis, basically. Like the thoughts and intents. A man can think one thing but do the opposite. A "stiff neck and a hard heart" represent man's rebellion against revelation God has provided.

God has always tried to reveal His will to men (which was for their benefit, always), and man has always rebelled against God. Here is an example:


Acts 7:51-53
King James Version

51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.


The only difference between God (the Spirit) revealing His will to men then and His revealing His will to men now is the revelation itself. The Gospel begins in Genesis 3:15, and is given progressively as time marches on. However, understanding of the Gospel was withheld until this current Age. So today God is revealing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the hearts of men and women and the penalty for rejection becomes more severe (meaning men and women are held more accountable because the revelation is more direct (from God directly to the heart of the individual)).

As far as only those God places His Spirit in being able to walk in His statutes and Keep His judgments, I think we have to look at the Old Testament and see that men and women were justified for their obedience (even though we know that obedience was not perfect nor able to be "good" enough that they might receive Eternal Redemption). Luke 1:5-6 is a good example. So is Luke 18:10-14.

Secondly we have to distinguish between Positional Sanctification (which is the process of the believer being eternally set apart unto God) and Progressive Sanctification which is the process by which we are made holy in our daily conversation. The latter is a lifelong process which will—because of our flesh—never be completed in this lifetime.




I hope that helps present where I stand a little better.

In Ezekiel 36:22-27 we see the New Birth promised: cleansing through the Word, a new heart (our minds are changed concerning who we are), a new spirit (our actions are changed based on our new understanding), and God's eternal Spirit taking up residence in us to lead and guide us in life.

Ezekiel 37 depicts a more Israel-specific restoration and resurrection on a National basis.

These two passages should have immediately been thought of by Nicodemus when the Lord said men must be born again. Instead—he gives it a physical context and receives rebuke.


God bless.

Yes I believe Jesus was rebuking him as well for the same reasons you mentioned with the scriptures.

 

[Paul4JC]

Given the title of the OP, I assume that in "You take a lawyer's interpretation of what the Bible teaches and this is what you get" you are talking of Calvin.

Unfortunately, Calvin's influence has spread far beyond just the Reformed churches and has undermined the Gospel message by throwing in a caveat - how do you know whether or not God chose you to be elect long beforehand?

Questions to Calvinists: How can Peter offer salvation in Acts 2:38-39 conditionally to the crowd (based upon repentance) when it is only available to some?

You mean Jean Chauvin? Or Chauvinism?

I think the OP should have had a poll:

Do you think Calvin was saved?
​

1. Yes beyond doubt! His doctrine is flawless. He intellectually ascended to heaven.
2. He was predestined to be. He was God's first elect.
3. No! He was a tyrant, and murderer, and taught a false gospel. He went to hell.
4. I don't know.
5. I don't like polls.
6. Search the scriptures.
7. CF will ban you from posting this, as this thread has 666,000 views.

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[zoidar]

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

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.

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? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
— Romans 9:22-24

I have come to realize (with some help) the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction is the fleshly Israel, Israel by descendance, Jews only.

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

But as for Israel He says, “All the day long I have stretched out My hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.”
— Romans 10:21


And the vessels of mercy is the spiritual Israel, not Jews only, but also Gentiles.

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

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

 

[Hazelelponi]

Hi again,

There is a difference how you view the atonement. Lutherans believe the atonement is universal (even Hitler's sins were paid), yet not applied universally (not applied to Hitler since he doesn't receive the payment).

I believe the atoning sacrifice is universal (a payment for all sin), but the atonement as the effect of the atoning sacrifice on the individual is limited to those who believe (your personal sins are "paid" as you believe).

And you (most Calvinists?) believe the atoning sacrifice and the atonement are limited (there is only a payment for the sins of the elect and only the sins of the elect were paid). So there are different options without going over to universialism.

God bless!

God bless you too!

Sorry been on hiatus... I'll reply to you later this afternoon, after I get back from the doctor..

 

[Clare73]

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? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
— Romans 9:22-24

I have come to realize (with some help) the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction is the fleshly Israel, Israel by descendance, Jews only.

The NT is replete with testimony that the vessels of wrath are all those who do not savingly believe in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, they are not just Jews. (e.g., John 3:18)

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
But as for Israel He says, “All the day long I have stretched out My hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.”
— Romans 10:21
And the vessels of mercy is the spiritual Israel, not Jews only, but also Gentiles.

As the vessels of wrath are not only Jews, but also Gentiles.

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

 

[zoidar]

The NT is replete with testimony that the vessels of wrath are all those who do not savingly believe in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, they are not just Jews. (e.g., John 3:18)

As the vessels of wrath are not only Jews, but also Gentiles.

John 3:18 doesn't use the expression "vessels of wrath", or mention vessel or wrath at all. It's not a discussion if unbelievers are under God's wrath, for surely they are, but the discussion is what Paul refers to in Romans 9:22 by vessels of wrath.

You also need to show that the NT teaches that the vessels of wrath refers to those that aren't of the elect, not only that it refers to unbelievers.

 

[Clare73]

John 3:18 doesn't use the expression "vessels of wrath", or mention vessel or wrath at all. It's not a discussion if unbelievers are under God's wrath, for surely they are, but the discussion is what Paul refers to in Romans 9:22 by vessels of wrath.

You also need to show that the NT teaches that the vessels of wrath refers to those that aren't of the elect, not only that it refers to unbelievers.

Unbelievers aren't of the elect.

 

[zoidar]

Unbelievers aren't of the elect.

I agree!

But you are really confusing me. I thought you believed those who will be saved are of the elect, even as unbelievers. What have I missed?

 

[Clare73]

I agree!

But you are really confusing me. I thought you believed those who will be saved are of the elect, even as unbelievers. What have I missed?

Those dying in unbelief are not the elect.
The elect are elected to belief (and all that comes with that). (Romans 8:28-30)
None of the elect die in unbelief.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Back to the OP. What is wrong with Calvinism ? I will give you a brief summary .

1- everything

 

[Clare73]

Back to the OP. What is wrong with Calvinism ? I will give you a brief summary .

1- everything

And I'm thinkin' Romans 8:28-30; Romans 11:7; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1 are anything but wrong, and so-o-o supremely right.

 

[zoidar]

Those dying in unbelief are not the elect.
The elect are elected to belief (and all that comes with that). (Romans 8:28-30)
None of the elect die in unbelief.

Yeah, but that's not what you said.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

And I'm thinkin' Romans 8:28-30; Romans 11:7; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1 are anything but wrong, and so-o-o supremely right.

You made my point . 4 verses out of 31,100.

 

[Clare73]

Yeah, but that's not what you said.

Don't know why it wouldn't be, because that is what I think.

 

[Der Alte]

You made my point . 4 verses out of 31,100.

The KJV has 31, 172 vss. Just sayin'.

 

[Clare73]

You made my point . 4 verses out of 31,100.

Your point is how many times God must say it before it is true?

Once is enough for me. . .

So that is why you have trouble with the Scriptures?

.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

The KJV has 31, 172 vss. Just sayin'.

I knew it was over 31 k