Why are so many against reformed Theology…

[Bob Carabbio]

Hey, Bob, I notice you're conversing with others, but not me any more, how come?

I guess in the flurry of "alerts" I overlooked yours. I don't bother with "Threads" here, just "alerts".

So then, if you understand Paul's description of God's choice as arbitrary, are you then in disagreement with him on that matter?

I Agree with him (Since it's God's WORD), but don't seek to totally understand what he's saying. The Bible CONSTANTLY talks of "OUR responsibilities". Reformed theology teaches that we don't have any.

What's being discussed is the "Reformed Paradigm", which, regardless of Reformed claims to the contrary, states that EVERYTHING is arbitrary - based on whether or not God "Without any moderating considerations", "Elects us" ("U") - i.e. Rom 9:11 "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth"

And: Rom 9:18 "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth".

That's Arbitrary. Paul's answer is "unsatisfying": Rom 9:20 "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction"

i.e. It is what it is - deal with it.

And obviously, regardless of Reformed Theological weasel words, the "DIE WAS CAST" when Election occurred arbitrarily Thousands of years ago, and man had ZERO personal options at that point, no choices.

FANTASTIC!!! for the "Elect", and inconceivably horrendous, and totally hopeless for those Born only to be damned.

 

[ripple the car]

Best I can explain.

but I think your issue is partly because reformed theology isn't just "Calvinism", people use the term Calvinist or Calvinism, but reformed is far more accurate as Calvin is just a man whose teachings are respected - but certainly he's not the only one who influenced the reformers - reformers who were influences in their own right regardless of who influenced them.

Another is that if your talking to a Lutheran, which is also a reformed theology, your going to get a theology far closer to Catholicism than even Calvin believed in, and certainly far closer than people taught the farther you get away from the early reformation period itself..

My husband always says, Luther didn't go far enough away from Catholicism. (his opinion)

And Im going to guess that if your talking to a reformed Baptist, your going to get different answers in some areas, than if your talking to a Primitive Baptist, both of whom are "Calvinistic" churches..

Calvinistic and reformed doctrines comes in degrees of agreement and disagreement with those preachers who may have influenced them... and so in some areas you will see varying degrees of agreement and disagreement with what you see and consider reformed.

As a general rule, reformed just means influenced doctrinally by those pastors who were part of, and came out of, the reformation movement which began when Luther first felt the need to correct, and then later leave, Catholicism...

Calvin, for some reason is just the most famous and the easiest to use to distinguish itself from doctrines that sprung from Wesleyan influences.. But reformed churches have a lot in common with many reformation pastors and thoughts..

So Calvinism, as a whole, is just a name coming in many degrees - so your likely to get many different answers.. and reformed is an even wider an umbrella term than that.

But I assume this is a good place to ask, if you wanted the answer.

But be warned, not even Calvinists agree with Calvin on everything. He is, in the end, just a man...

Hey, thanks, Hazelelponi. By Reformed, I literally meant Calvinistic. Sorry I didn't clarify!

It just seems to be that what is often described as TULIP seems to have different meanings depending on who is describing or talking about it. I have heard some describe Total Depravity as meaning man's will and nature have no capacity at all to choose or want God prior to conversion, while others seem to say the opposite. Which makes me wonder if perhaps "TULIP" is not as useful a way of describing things as one might think, or if Calvin's actual theology was more nuanced than TULIP.

 

[His student]

His student said: ↑

It's unconditional election and not "arbitrary election". The two are not the same.

And the difference is???

Unconditional election means that election is not conditional or limited on or by anything other than God's own perfect will.

Arbitrary election means that election is at random or by chance or made as a capricious and unreasonable act of God's will.

While God, no doubt, has His reason for choosing to enlighten some and leaving others to their own fallen reasoning - Reformed theology maintains correctly that He is never capricious of unreasonable in any of His decisions or actions.

His decisions are always decided through His good and perfect nature and reasoning.

He may not have told us why He does all things He does. But we can rest assured that He has good reasons for everything He does.

Do you really think that Reformed theologians believe and teach otherwise or is this simply a straw man of your own making?

 

[1Reformedman]

I think we can have a good indication of how God's love is, through God, the Holy Spirit.

A good indication may or may not be accurate. Our perception is flawed as we are finite. We need to stop relying on our abilities and trust God.

 

[1Reformedman]

Hey, thanks, Hazelelponi. By Reformed, I literally meant Calvinistic. Sorry I didn't clarify!

It just seems to be that what is often described as TULIP seems to have different meanings depending on who is describing or talking about it. I have heard some describe Total Depravity as meaning man's will and nature have no capacity at all to choose or want God prior to conversion, while others seem to say the opposite. Which makes me wonder if perhaps "TULIP" is not as useful a way of describing things as one might think, or if Calvin's actual theology was more nuanced than TULIP.

You should know that there are people who claim to be either 5 point or 4 point Calvinists. Those who say the "opposite" are not 5 point believers. They are 4 point believers. IF one is intellectually honest he cannot truly be a 4 point Calvinist because TULIP (aka Doctrines of Grace) cannot be separated as all 5 points fully describe the Doctrines of Grace.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Yes, but no one has argued at any time in this discussion that God is NOT loving.

? Perfect love (God's Love) casts out all fear. Truth.
How many people believe God IS that loving, and experientially (in truth) have no fear ?
============================

I think we can have a good indication of how God's love is, through God, the Holy Spirit.

A good indication may or may not be accurate. Our perception is flawed as we are finite. We need to stop relying on our abilities and trust God.

thus, as he posted, "through God" the ONLY experientially accurate way .....

 

[zoidar]

A good indication may or may not be accurate. Our perception is flawed as we are finite. We need to stop relying on our abilities and trust God.

A "good" indication may be wrong, also a "good" understanding of scripture may be wrong.

What we need to do can be discussed.

 

[Albion]

? Perfect love (God's Love) casts out all fear. Truth.
How many people believe God IS that loving, and experientially (in truth) have no fear ?

I am confident that almost all Christians are convinced that God is loving. But they are susceptible to second-guessing his love for them in particular when they don't get what they think they deserve.

 

[renniks]

So, according to Reformed Theology, faith in the gospel is post-regeneration (Titus 3:5). It is the effect, or result, of spiritual rebirth. This is in alignment with Paul's distinction between the "natural man" and "he who is spiritual" in 1 Cor. 2. And this idea taught by Paul is essentially unconditional election. This is simply acknowledging what we believe Paul teaches concerning the cause and effect of God's working in our lives.

This verse doesn't teach regeneration before salvation. And there is many verses that confirm belief comes first. When I'm not on my phone and have time, I'll post some. Actually, you have it exactly backwards. If God chooses certain people and bypasses others, the chosen have reason to boast. If salvation is offered to the most sinful people also, we know we are no better. Our choice doesn't save us, but it is God's requirement before he will do the work.

 

[renniks]

Then what is it conditioned on? If nothing then logically it's arbitrary.

The U just means its not conditioned upon the actions of man.

 

[1Reformedman]

? Perfect love (God's Love) casts out all fear. Truth.
How many people believe God IS that loving, and experientially (in truth) have no fear ?
============================



thus, as he posted, "through God" the ONLY experientially accurate way .....

I think he was speaking about something else, specifically grasping the understanding of God's love. Unbelievers dont see that love even though they experience common Grace which is a form of God's love but its different than the love God has for his children. Heck, even believers don't have a full grasp on the way God loves us. Now we look through a glass darkly. His ways are higher than ours.

 

[renniks]

No that is you reading free will into the text. You were taught to do that. God never regretted making us. That is a twist of the OT verse. NO God didn't cause what he is complaining about and you dont know what reformed theology is if you believe that is what it teaches.

I've studied it extensively and that's exactly what it teaches.... Y'all just refuse to use those words.

 

[1Reformedman]

A "good" indication may be wrong, also a "good" understanding of scripture may be wrong.

What we need to do can be discussed.

agreed that is why its important to exegete the word of God not eisegete it.

 

[1Reformedman]

I've studied it extensively and that's exactly what it teaches.... Y'all just refuse to use those words.

I dont think you have because your explanation of it isn't consistent with what we believe.

 

[1Reformedman]

I've studied it extensively and that's exactly what it teaches.... Y'all just refuse to use those words.

says YOU!! I live it so dont tell me what we believe.

 

[Albion]

If God chooses certain people and bypasses others, the chosen have reason to boast.

Except that they don't know that or if they are chosen.

 

[zoidar]

agreed that is why its important to exegete the word of God not eisegete it.

Also a "good" exegesis may be wrong. I can say with pretty much certainty, and I think you agree with this, that no one has the perfect understanding of scripture.

 

[tdidymas]

This verse doesn't teach regeneration before salvation. And there is many verses that confirm belief comes first. When I'm not on my phone and have time, I'll post some. Actually, you have it exactly backwards. If God chooses certain people and bypasses others, the chosen have reason to boast. If salvation is offered to the most sinful people also, we know we are no better. Our choice doesn't save us, but it is God's requirement before he will do the work.

Actually, you have it backward. If God elects people based on their choices, then those people have a boast. "God chose me because I chose Him first." If God elects people based solely on what is in Himself, then we have no cause for boasting at all. It's God's grace alone.

And where do you get the idea that human choice is God's requirement before He will do any work? John 3:21 says "But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God." This shows that coming to Jesus already includes the faith that He can save, and already includes the God-gifted spiritual wisdom to understand that gospel message, which requires a person to be born of the Spirit in order to be a spiritual person who understands it, since those with natural thinking only are not able to discern this, because they are blind to spiritual truth, and love darkness instead of light.
TD

 

[Albion]

says YOU!! I live it so dont tell me what we believe.

It may be that what has been explained here will help other readers who have wondered about Reformed theology, even if not every last person is in that category.

 

[zoidar]

It may be that what has been explained here will help other readers who have wondered about Reformed theology, even if not every last person is in that category.

I hope that is true.