Why I don't believe in Calvinism.

[Albion]

Or, that God, omniscient and existing outside of time, simply cannot help but know in advance what the free choices of His creatures, who do exist in time, will be.

Foreknowledge isn't the issue or in contest.

Predestination is, however.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Philippians 2:13: "for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure".

Foreknowledge precedes human will & not the other way round. If humans could choose otherwise, foreknowledge becomes meaningless. Thus foreknowledge means human will isn't free.

I really should not have to argue against Calvinism. It's pretty ridiculous - IMO. I believe it is a violation of basic morality and the Bible. I believe that a few verses can be taken out of context to support Calvinism, but it is not the majority of the Scriptures, though. I don't believe the writings of the canons of Dort should be added to the Bible. The Bible alone is sufficient.

 

[Albion]

I believe that a few verses can be taken out of context to support Calvinism, but it is not the majority of the Scriptures, though.

Well, that's the rub. Personal feelings aside, there is enough there in Scripture for any of us to make a reasonable case for either Election or Freewill.

I don't believe the writings of the canons of Dort should be added to the Bible.

No one does.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Bible nowhere says humans could freely choose. "Believe" doesn't mean "you could believe" or "you could produce faith". You haven't quoted a single scripture to rice one could produce faith.

Instead Bible says only the sheep can believe (John 10:26), that is, only those who were appointed for eternal life (Acts 13:48).

Your theology is only based on implications while disallowing Scripture.

Yes, it does. In many places the Bible says we have free will to choose.
Free will is a choice that leads you down a path that determines which road you want to take.

Free Will in the Bible:

#1. Joshua 24:15 KJV -
"Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve"

#2. Matthew 11:28 KJV -
"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

#3. John 7:17 KJV -
"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God."

#4. John 7:37 KJV -
"If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink."

#5. Acts 2:38 KJV -
"Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized"

#6. Acts 3:19 KJV -
"Repent therefore and be converted"

#7. Acts 16:31 KJV -
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved"

#8. Acts 17:30 KJV -
"but now commands all men everywhere to repent"

#9. Revelation 22:17 KJV -
"Whoever wills, let him take the water of life freely."

#10. Genesis 4:7 KJV -
"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

#11. Revelation 22:17 KJ2
"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that hears say, Come. And let him that is thirsty come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

#12. Luke 13:34 NLT -
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.

 

[Albion]

Hmm. I think I see part of the problem now. Of the verses you posted, most do not actually preclude Predestination. That's because we are all born in sin and in need of choosing Christ (and thereby being saved). To be predestined simply means that you have been named to receive the Faith which will allow you to do that. That the Bible includes many admonitions about coming to Christ isn't something that proves either POV.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Well, that's the rub. Personal feelings aside, there is enough there in Scripture for any of us to make a reasonable case for either Election or Freewill.

God gave us a brain (to think logically), and emotions for a reason.
If this was not the case, then there would be no order, peace, or any way to truly understand something properly and or to function properly. Marriages could not survive without emotion. Love for God could not survive if it was not for emotion. There is always a right way and a wrong way. For feelings is how we even came to the faith for the first time. A godly sorrow that leads to repentance vs. a fake sorrow that is of the world (2 Corinthians 7:10). We see in the Parable of the Tax Collector: The tax collector cried out to God to have mercy on him for his sins. This is emotional. This is also logical because of the gospel. But without the heart, the faith does not mean anything. The truth of the gospel would just be an acknowledgement of a set of historical facts alone. But it is more than that. Faith is a matter of the heart, as well. We see this with the woman who would not stop kissing Jesus's feet and he was anointing His feet with her tears.

But let's not kid each other. There is no case you can make for Unconditional Election. What purpose would the judgment be if it was God who put them there against their will? That would be like putting robots on trial because it was merely following it's programming. What would it serve Jesus to preach against unrighteousness and sin if it was all just predetermined by God to be a certain way? Again, it makes little sense. There has to be a logical reason to explain these kinds of problems in Calvinism (of which Calvinism is never able to explain). Hence, why I believe it is ridiculous.

I don't believe the writings of the canons of Dort should be added to the Bible.

No one does.

While folks do not say they are official words added to the Bible, they are treated as if it was on the same authority as if it was the Bible because of the uplifting of such teachings. TULIP is (from the canons of Dort) is uplifted above what the Bible says. Glory is given to these written works rather than the Savior and the Bible alone.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hmm. I think I see part of the problem now. Of the verses you posted, most do not actually preclude Predestination. That's because we are all born in sin and in need of choosing Christ (and thereby being saved). To be predestined simply means that you have been named to receive the Faith which will allow you to do that. That the Bible includes many admonitions about coming to Christ isn't something that proves either POV.

"The Elect" is just another way of saying the "Corporate Church" as a whole.

The following Jewish believers in Christ became part of the Church or the Body of Christ and as a result, they became part of "the Elect." The Church is "the Elect" and not any individual alone.

1 "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, ..."

In other words,

#1. Peter.
#2. Strangers throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

Are the Elect as a whole.

The nation of Israel was elected by the Lord God to be His people. This election is as a nation. Some individuals in the elect had faith in God and others did not. This election is the Old Testament covenant between Israel and God and is the basis for naming the Scriptures the Old Testament, meaning Old Covenant.

3 "And I will give you the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that you may know that I, the LORD, who call you by your name, am the God of Israel.
4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel my elect, I have even called you by your name: I have named you, though you have not known me.
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God besides me: I girded you, though you have not known me:
6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from thewest, that there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:3-6).​

Here we see above Israel (as a nation) was "elect" but yet they did not know God (i.e. they were not saved).

 

[Albion]

But let's not kid each other. There is no case you can make for Unconditional Election.

The case is in Scripture.

What purpose would the judgment be if it was God who put them there against their will?

Against their will? He didn't ask any of us if we would like to be born.

That would be like putting robots on trial because it was merely following it's programming.

Try to avoid that common misconception about Predestination. It doesn't suggest that anyone will be a robot or robotic.

What would it serve Jesus to preach against unrighteousness and sin if it was all just predetermined by God to be a certain way?

To teach truth and Godliness. In daily life, we often make claims about what's right or wrong, but not because we are counting noses. Instead we seek to assert the truth for its own sake and as a witness to all who hear or read it.

While folks do not say they are official words added to the Bible, they are treated as if it was on the same authority as if it was the Bible because of the uplifting of such teachings.

I don't think that's so. You just got a bit too poetic at that point.

 

[Albion]

"The Elect" is just another way of saying the "Corporate Church" as a whole.

That may be how you use the word, but I was using it in the context of Calvinism since that is our topic here.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The case is in Scripture.

No it's not. Again, it is illogical to preach against unrighteous and sin or for Jesus to desire for Israel to be gathered like a hen gathers its chicks under its wings if it was all predetermined. Things have to make logical sense when we read the Bible. That would be like assuming there was no oxygen back then or that the sky was red all the time or something. Certain verses taken out of context to prove something illogical is just silly.

Against their will? He didn't ask any of us if we would like to be born.

We are not talking about being born, or being able to fly or shoot lasers from our eyes. There are limitations upon mankind and things that we have no control over, but the point of the Judgment would not make any sense if it was God who placed us there. Again, that would be like putting a robot on trial for it doing what the programmer wanted. If God did not want them to be at the judgment and He could have changed it, then why have a judgment? Judgments are for when you failed to do something or when you did something correct or right. Our court system of justice acts in a similar way. People who go to court because they committed a crime were not forced to be there by the judge. The judge did not program the criminal to be in court by some kind of MK-Ultra program to commit crimes. The criminal is responsible for his own crimes.

But Calvinism is making the Judge to be partly responsible for the state that they are in. This is the problem with Unconditional Election. It is saying that God chooses some to be saved and others to not be saved based on No conditions whatsoever. This means He chooses at random or for no reason those He wants saved or not saved. That would be like a child creating a bunch of clay figures and saying some are good and some are bad, and then he smashes some of the clay figures in a childish rage because he has decreed for no good reason that He does not like them.

Try to avoid that common misconception about Predestination. It doesn't suggest that anyone will be a robot or robotic.

I am talking about Unconditional Election. An election based on no conditions. This is what Calvinism illogically proposes.

To teach truth and Godliness. In daily life, we often make claims about what's right or wrong, but not because we are counting noses. Instead we seek to assert the truth for its own sake and as a witness to all who hear or read it.

No. Your not getting it. Jesus did not talk about righteous living so as to create a better life for unbelievers. The teachings on righteous living by Jesus is for believers only. Righteous living is a part of eternal life. For without holiness, no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14). Jesus said to those believers who did good works to depart from Him because they also worked iniquity or sin (Matthew 7:23).

The teaching on righteous living only makes sense if there are actual consequences in teaching such a thing. Jesus said things like if you look upon a woman in lust, your whole body can be cast into hell fire (Matthew 5:28-30). If Unconditional Election was true, Jesus would not be warning against anyone's sins, but he would be talking in a more Calvinistic way. He would say things like, you need to be "elected" (Which is something I have no control over) in order to live holy. But Jesus did not talk that way. He said repent or perish (Luke 13:3). The word "if" appears a lot in the Bible in regards to our right standing with God. Such a word would not be there if Unconditional Election was true.

While folks do not say they are official words added to the Bible, they are treated as if it was on the same authority as if it was the Bible because of the uplifting of such teachings.

I don't think that's so. You just got a bit too poetic at that point.

I disagree. Just look at how TULIP is promoted. Also, folks do not become Calvinist without them being convinced by Calvinistic websites and or without reading the canons of Dort. Again, if such a truth was in the Bible, there would be no need to push such things. A person would just naturally come to such conclusions on their own. But nobody comes to these conclusions on their own without Calvinistic teachers.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That may be how you use the word, but I was using it in the context of Calvinism since that is our topic here.

There is only one context and that is the context of what the Bible actually says. Calvinism does not make sense in light of the Bible, basic morality, and what we know about the real world. Again, do men go to court today because they had no control over their own crimes? Do you think there are cases where men have learned from their mistakes? Or do you think they are all programmed to be a certain way? If such is the case, then why are men off the hook when it comes to making a decision with God? Granted, I am not saying that there are not points in a life of a person where God draws them and without this drawing they cannot see the things of God, but the point here is that they are not forced against their will to be a certain way. If such were the case, then what we do does not matter here. Life would be totally without hope and meaningless if God chose some to be saved and others to not be saved.

 

[Albion]

No it's not.

Yes, it is. And as I recall, you already admitted it. Anyway, it might be worthwhile for you to pose some question in the Reformed forum where I am sure there are people who will amplify this point for you.

Again, it is illogical to preach against unrighteous and sin or for Jesus to desire for Israel to be gathered like a hen gathers its chicks under its wings if it was all predetermined.

I already answered this one.

Things have to make logical sense when we read the Bible. That would be like assuming there was no oxygen back then or that the sky was red all the time or something.

When there are verses that seem clearly to support Predestination and Eternal Security, it is not a matter of assuming something like a theoretical lack of oxygen at an earlier time in history, etc.

There are limitations upon mankind and things that we have no control over, but the point of the Judgment would not make any sense if it was God who placed us there.

I think there would be. God is just, so we do not doubt his role as judge. And if anyone comes to him as evil, unGodly, an unrepentant violator of the Ten Commandments, an unbeliever, etc. then it makes perfect sense for God to judge them unworthy. He created mankind good, but it (in Adam) chose something else. This we know from Scripture.

But nobody comes to these conclusions on their own without Calvinistic teachers.

Just like the people who come to any one of dozens of other denominations through the influence of some other person, eh?

 

[Si_monfaith]

Yes, it does. In many places the Bible says we have free will to choose.
Free will is a choice that leads you down a path that determines which road you want to take.

Free Will in the Bible:

#1. Joshua 24:15 KJV -
"Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve"

#2. Matthew 11:28 KJV -
"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

#3. John 7:17 KJV -
"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God."

#4. John 7:37 KJV -
"If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink."

#5. Acts 2:38 KJV -
"Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized"

#6. Acts 3:19 KJV -
"Repent therefore and be converted"

#7. Acts 16:31 KJV -
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved"

#8. Acts 17:30 KJV -
"but now commands all men everywhere to repent"

#9. Revelation 22:17 KJV -
"Whoever wills, let him take the water of life freely."

#10. Genesis 4:7 KJV -
"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

#11. Revelation 22:17 KJ2
"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that hears say, Come. And let him that is thirsty come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

#12. Luke 13:34 NLT -
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.

Totally wrong. All these verses instruct to choose but NONE says you could freely choose.

 

[Si_monfaith]

I really should not have to argue against Calvinism. It's pretty ridiculous - IMO. I believe it is a violation of basic morality and the Bible. I believe that a few verses can be taken out of context to support Calvinism, but it is not the majority of the Scriptures, though. I don't believe the writings of the canons of Dort should be added to the Bible. The Bible alone is sufficient.

Your statements are ridiculously circular arguments proving NOTHING.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Or, that God, omniscient and existing outside of time, simply cannot help but know in advance what the free choices of His creatures, who do exist in time, will be.

He foreknows their choices & yet goes ahead to create them instead of stopping them from existing. Thus He predetermines their destiny.

 

[Sam91]

There is only one context and that is the context of what the Bible actually says. Calvinism does not make sense in light of the Bible, basic morality, and what we know about the real world. Again, do men go to court today because they had no control over their own crimes? Do you think there are cases where men have learned from their mistakes? Or do you think they are all programmed to be a certain way? If such is the case, then why are men off the hook when it comes to making a decision with God? Granted, I am not saying that there are not points in a life of a person where God draws them and without this drawing they cannot see the things of God, but the point here is that they are not forced against their will to be a certain way. If such were the case, then what we do does not matter here. Life would be totally without hope and meaningless if God chose some to be saved and others to not be saved.

Sadly man's doctrine has put scales over the eyes so they can not/will not see. Just like we were warned about in scripture. I don't think it's possible to make seasoned calvinist debators actually read what you type and read the bible without reading it through their indoctrinated lenses.

 

[fhansen]

He foreknows their choices & yet goes ahead to create them instead of stopping them from existing. Thus He predetermines their destiny.

If He predetermines their destiny then they can make no choices that could be merely foreknown by Him; He would make the choices for them. But instead they determine their destiny, by their choices. Otherwise we'd be saying that it's absolutely impossible for God to create a being with free will-simply because He cannot help but know the choices they will make. That would be like saying that, if you were miraculously given the gift of foreknowledge about a friend's choices, those choices would automatically be rendered not free.

As it is we're morally accountable beings because we're given the knowledge of justice; we know right from wrong. And this, incidentally, is why we can experience moral outrage or righteous indignation at atrocities and injustices committed in this world.

 

[Albion]

If He predetermines their destiny then they can make no choices that could be merely foreknown by Him; He would make the choices for them.

That isn't true. Predestination applies only to the ability to choose God (who we must admit is beyond our abilities to fully comprehend).

With the other of life's choices, we have free will--whom to marry, where to live, a million actions each day, and so on.

At least, that is Calvinism...and since we are supposedly talking about Calvinism here, it matters.

 

[~Zao~]

In my calculations to pre-determine people’s choices is to determine pre-existence of the person. There is no scripture that establishes that, therefore beyond anyone's ability to fully comprehend. The alternative is to assume that God creates vessels w/o free-will.

 

[fhansen]

That isn't true. Predestination applies only to the ability to choose God (who we must admit is beyond our abilities to fully comprehend).

With the other of life's choices, we have free will--whom to marry, where to live, a million actions each day, and so on.

At least, that is Calvinism...and since we are supposedly talking about Calvinism here, it matters.

So, yes, even with grace our comprehension of God is only partial in this life, and our wills are not overwhelmed by it as if we're merely passive players. Man's choice comes into play when he's made aware of the options, when God draws man to Himself. Because even then man can resist and reject this grace. He can still say "no", as Adam did in Eden.