Would you glorify God if Calvinism was true?

[BNR32FAN]

What I'm describing is still Calvinist.

People aren't going to know whether God opened their hearts to understand the message (Luke 24:45 and Acts 16:14)

How are you going to know? We approach everyone as it they are elect or will be the elect of God. Anyone curious about the faith is potentially someone drawn by God.

Do you think Calvinists share the Gospel differently than someone who believes in free will? It's a Gospel invitation the same...

It's just an invitation to Christ that doesn't depend on self for anything, salvation is the work of Christ alone.

So you believe that people can repent and believe the gospel even if they were not chosen before creation? Because it’s my understanding that according to Calvinism if someone was not chosen before creation they are not regenerate and therefore absolutely cannot repent and believe the gospel.

 

[Hazelelponi]

So you believe that people can repent and believe the gospel even if they were not chosen before creation?

I believe those God saves, He chose from the foundation of the world to save, without regard to persons.

Because it’s my understanding that according to Calvinism if someone was not chosen before creation they are not regenerate and therefore absolutely cannot repent and believe the gospel.

Well, we become regenerate when God regenerates us.

Prior to that we are as unregenerate as everyone else

In someone's unregenerate state they have desires for sin and they will chase those desires over the things of God at every opportunity, making them dead in their sins and trespasses.

I don't believe they "can't" repent, I believe they won't.

In order to save any at all God picked some to save That's probably a bad way to put it but it's understandable anyway.

It's not terribly relevant to much when it comes to sharing the Gospel though. We just have a sovereign God in election, and God orders everything for the good of the elect:

"And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose" Romans 8:28

I haven't really gone through the Supralapsarian etc debates and discussions yet but Supra makes the most sense to me so far. I'm sure there's other views even within Calvinism though; one of them appears to be called we don't need to put an order to it... That one has perks.

 

[Johan2222]

So when you become a believer you turn your back on your loved ones instead of trying to bring them to Christ? Is that what you think 2 Corinthians 6:14 is saying? No I think Paul is talking about getting married to an unbeliever. I’m not sure if you realize this but nobody is born a believer. So what do you do when your child is born? Abandon it according to 2 Corinthians 6:14?

Do I think God does things arbitrarily? No absolutely not, but I do think that’s what Calvinism teaches.

Perhaps you misunderstood my post but my position is that God chose people for salvation before creation according to His foreknowledge of those who would abide in Christ and endure to the end because of their willingness to comply with God’s calling in the gospel. Do you disagree with this position?

Hazelponi and Joseph G and Clare73 have also alluded to the root of your error, but I know iron necks are difficult to turn and I am under no illusions about the virtually impossible task I face.

When I see a question like Satan asked Eve in the garden basically asking “Would you really glorify God” if X or Y or Z were true or untrue, I know who is behind the question and oh that you could see it as well.

If it wasn’t for Jude 1.23, I might even abandon my duty, for I am a weak and foolish man of little faith, raised in an age where the love of many has grown cold and I know that bad company corrupts good manners.

Knowing the wretchedness that was upon me before those things made me worse, perhaps you can have compassion on my weakness.

Before I answered your question, I considered several scriptures, including;

Proverbs 26.4
Proverbs 26.5
Titus 3.9
Proverbs 13.16

Knowing they all helped a fool like me, I thought it might be worthwhile mentioning them.

By the way, please be assured that everybody who does arrive in heaven is going to glorify God, regardless of what you might think and regardless of your cunning little voting system.

Also, may I dare to suggest that the glorification of the doctrines of men and the denominations of men (even by Titus 3.9 questions, giving publicity to the names men have given them) does nothing to further the gospel of the kingdom.

If you want some profitable scriptures to teach on, Matthew 5.19 might be a good start, but don’t forget to study up on the subject matter yourself first.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Hazelponi and Joseph G and Clare73 have also alluded to the root of your error, but I know iron necks are difficult to turn and I am under no illusions about the virtually impossible task I face.

When I see a question like Satan asked Eve in the garden basically asking “Would you really glorify God” if X or Y or Z were true or untrue, I know who is behind the question and oh that you could see it as well.

If it wasn’t for Jude 1.23, I might even abandon my duty, for I am a weak and foolish man of little faith, raised in an age where the love of many has grown cold and I know that bad company corrupts good manners.

Knowing the wretchedness that was upon me before those things made me worse, perhaps you can have compassion on my weakness.

Before I answered your question, I considered several scriptures, including;

Proverbs 26.4
Proverbs 26.5
Titus 3.9
Proverbs 13.16

Knowing they all helped a fool like me, I thought it might be worthwhile mentioning them.

By the way, please be assured that everybody who does arrive in heaven is going to glorify God, regardless of what you might think and regardless of your cunning little voting system.

Also, may I dare to suggest that the glorification of the doctrines of men and the denominations of men (even by Titus 3.9 questions, giving publicity to the names men have given them) does nothing to further the gospel of the kingdom.

If you want some profitable scriptures to teach on, Matthew 5.19 might be a good start, but don’t forget to study up on the subject matter yourself first.

It's about life in the end, and making that life we were given a worship of Him, a song made in His honor, for His Glory, in praise of His Majesty.

I'm still working on it... but I have a hope in Him that all will be accomplished, because all WAS accomplished, for the Praise of His Glory.

 

[Johan2222]

It's about life . . . . . for the Praise of His Glory.

Sorry, I edited your post because I couldn’t help but notice how the beginning and end of it, when put together as one sentence, so perfectly revealed our whole purpose in life.

Ecclesiastes 12:13 RSV
. . . . Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I don't believe they "can't" repent, I believe they won't.

What you said in this statement contradicts what you said previously.

Well, we become regenerate when God regenerates us.

Prior to that we are as unregenerate as everyone else

In someone's unregenerate state they have desires for sin and they will chase those desires over the things of God at every opportunity, making them dead in their sins and trespasses.

It seems to me that you see the problem with Calvinism but are trying to defend it because you don’t want to admit the problem. I see this defense every time I point out the problem with the doctrine of unconditional election. Calvinists teach that the unregenerate CAN’T repent until the problem with God’s judgement upon those who are incapable of repentance is unjust is presented, then they’ll switch to the “WON’T repent argument in an attempt to avoid the problem with God’s punishment being unjust because they see the dilemma but they refuse to admit it. If they didn’t see any problem with the unregenerate being punished for being incapable of repentance they wouldn’t feel the need to switch their position to the unregenerate won’t repent.

 

[BNR32FAN]

When I see a question like Satan asked Eve in the garden basically asking “Would you really glorify God” if X or Y or Z were true or untrue, I know who is behind the question and oh that you could see it as well.

satan said nothing similar to what you’re saying here. He said surely you will not die. That’s not even close to what I’m saying in this thread.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hazelponi and Joseph G and Clare73 have also alluded to the root of your error, but I know iron necks are difficult to turn and I am under no illusions about the virtually impossible task I face.

When I see a question like Satan asked Eve in the garden basically asking “Would you really glorify God” if X or Y or Z were true or untrue, I know who is behind the question and oh that you could see it as well.

If it wasn’t for Jude 1.23, I might even abandon my duty, for I am a weak and foolish man of little faith, raised in an age where the love of many has grown cold and I know that bad company corrupts good manners.

Knowing the wretchedness that was upon me before those things made me worse, perhaps you can have compassion on my weakness.

Before I answered your question, I considered several scriptures, including;

Proverbs 26.4
Proverbs 26.5
Titus 3.9
Proverbs 13.16

Knowing they all helped a fool like me, I thought it might be worthwhile mentioning them.

By the way, please be assured that everybody who does arrive in heaven is going to glorify God, regardless of what you might think and regardless of your cunning little voting system.

Also, may I dare to suggest that the glorification of the doctrines of men and the denominations of men (even by Titus 3.9 questions, giving publicity to the names men have given them) does nothing to further the gospel of the kingdom.

If you want some profitable scriptures to teach on, Matthew 5.19 might be a good start, but don’t forget to study up on the subject matter yourself first.

The fact of the matter is that I’m not saying that we shouldn’t or that we won’t glorify God because my question is based on the hypothetical validity of a heretical theology. my position is that we glorify God because of the nature of His character, not just because He’s the Creator and the most powerful being ever. It’s akin to saying if satan were the creator and the most powerful being would you glorify him? Should we praise him and worship satan based solely on the fact that he’s the creator and the most powerful being? No I believe we praise and worship God because of the nature of His character not just to save our own skin.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hazelponi and Joseph G and Clare73 have also alluded to the root of your error, but I know iron necks are difficult to turn and I am under no illusions about the virtually impossible task I face.

When I see a question like Satan asked Eve in the garden basically asking “Would you really glorify God” if X or Y or Z were true or untrue, I know who is behind the question and oh that you could see it as well.

If it wasn’t for Jude 1.23, I might even abandon my duty, for I am a weak and foolish man of little faith, raised in an age where the love of many has grown cold and I know that bad company corrupts good manners.

Knowing the wretchedness that was upon me before those things made me worse, perhaps you can have compassion on my weakness.

Before I answered your question, I considered several scriptures, including;

Proverbs 26.4
Proverbs 26.5
Titus 3.9
Proverbs 13.16

Knowing they all helped a fool like me, I thought it might be worthwhile mentioning them.

By the way, please be assured that everybody who does arrive in heaven is going to glorify God, regardless of what you might think and regardless of your cunning little voting system.

Also, may I dare to suggest that the glorification of the doctrines of men and the denominations of men (even by Titus 3.9 questions, giving publicity to the names men have given them) does nothing to further the gospel of the kingdom.

If you want some profitable scriptures to teach on, Matthew 5.19 might be a good start, but don’t forget to study up on the subject matter yourself first.

So you’re saying that according to these passages that we shouldn’t refute heresies? How would you apply these passages to the book of Galatians where Paul is refuting the heresy of mixing the law with grace throughout the entire book?

 

[Clare73]

“For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭17‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬
Why did death reign thru the one? He just told us in verse 12.
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, BECAUSE
ALL SINNED” Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭12‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

WHY DO YOU KEEP IGNORING THIS VERSE?

1) I am not ignoring Ro 5:12, I am explaining the dilemma which you ignore:

how did they sin between Adam and Moses where there was no law to sin against, and "where there is no law there is no sin" (Ro 5:13),
yet all died during that time because of sin. . .what sin?. . .that is the dilemma of Ro :12-14.
Please explain what sin caused their deaths between Adam and Moses when there was no law to sin against and, therefore, no sin.

“So then as through one transgression there RESULTED condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience THE MANY WERE MADE SINNERS, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭18‬-‭19‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Verses 18-19 DO NOT SAY ANYTHING WAS IMPUTED, verse 18 says
through one transgression there RESULTED condemnation to all men.

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty just as mankind is made righteous with the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
and where the imputation of sin (Ro 5:17, 12-16, 18-19) is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for that imputation of righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).

Condemnation was the result of Adam’s sin. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY ARE CONDEMNED BECAUSE ADAM’S SIN WAS IMPUTED ON THEM.

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17 nor Ro 5:12-16, the burden of which is the imputation of Adam's sin, which imputation is then paralleled with the imputation of Christ's righteousness in Ro 5:18-19.

READ VERSE 19

FOR BY THRU ONE MAN’S DISOBEDIENCE THE MANY WERE MADE SINNERS.

Precisely. . .they were made sinners the same way they were made righteous--by imputation, not by anything they had personally done.

So death spread to all because ALL SINNED because thru Adam’s sin ALL WERE MADE SINNERS.

THERE’S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT SIN BEING IMPUTED TO ANYONE.

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17, where GOD MADE ALL THOSE OF ADAM SINNERS by imputing Adam's sin to them, JUST AS
GOD MADE ALL THOSE OF CHRIST RIGHTEOUS by imputing Christ's righteousness to them (Ro 5:18-19).

GOD DOESN’T CONDEMN PEOPLE TO THE LAKE OF FIRE BECAUSE OF SOMETHING ADAM DID 6,000 YEARS AGO THAT NOBODY HAD ANY CONTROL OVER. IMPUTED SIN IS THE MOST ABSURD AND OUTRIGHT SLANDEROUS ACCUSATION TOWARDS GOD’S CHARACTER.

This is the kind of rationale that is produced by human thinking rather than divine revelation.

Everyone who knows anything about this passage can clearly see that we inherited Adam’s sinful nature NOT the guilt of His sin. You can keep copying and pasting these verses until Christ returns but what you can’t do is actually DEMONSTRATE where these verses say ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THE GUILT OF ADAM’S SIN BEING IMPUTED ON ANYONE.

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17. . .nor Ro 5:18-19. . .and that's above my pay grade.

 

[BNR32FAN]

1) I am not ignoring Ro 5:12, I am explaining the dilemma which you ignore:

how did they sin between Adam and Moses where there was no law to sin against, and "where there is no law there is no sin" (Ro 5:13),
yet all died because of sin. . .that is the dilemma of Ro :12-14.

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty just as mankind is made righteous with the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
which imputation of righteousness is patterned on (Ro 5:14) the imputation of sin (Ro 5:17, 18-19).

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17 nor Ro 5:12-16, the burden of which is the imputation of Adam's, which imputatio is then paralleled with the imputation of Christ's righteousness in Ro 5:18-19.

Precisely. . .they were made sinners the same way they were made righteous--by imputation, not by anything they had personally done.

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17, where GOD MADE ALL THOSE OF ADAM SINNERS by imputing Adam's sin to them, JUST AS
GOD MADE ALL THOSE OF CHRIST RIGHTEOUS by imputing Christ's righteousness to them (Ro 5:18-19).

This is the kind of rationale that is produced by human thinking rather than divine revelation.

Then you don't understand Ro 5:17. . .and that's above my pay grade.

I think I’ve explained it enough that everyone who actually wants to understand it will.

 

[Clare73]

Yes they sinned Paul specifically said death came to all because all sinned.

Wrong you’re misquoting the passage. It doesn’t say that there was no law between Adam & Moses.

Please present the law stated by God (thou shalt) to mankind before the commandments of Moses, against which law they sinned to cause their deaths between Adam and Moses.
There was none.

It says until the law sin was in the world. God telling Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge was the first law which is when sin began.

“for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

The "law" of Paul's reference point there is the Mosaic law, the first coded law which had a penalty of death attached to it for violation.

The meaning there is: there was no law by which to impute (charge) sin to mankind between Adam and Moses,
yet mankind died anyway.
So what sin was in the world to cause their deaths when there was no law by which to charge them with sin?
And your answer would be?

The answer of Ro 5:12-17 is that the sin in the world which caused their deaths was the sin of Adam imputed to them (Ro 5:17, 18-19), and which is likewise the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness, presented in Ro 5:18-19.

On what authority do you measure the justice of God by fallen human notions?

 

[Hazelelponi]

What you said in this statement contradicts what you said previously.

No it does not contradict. That you're not understanding does not make my posts self contradictory.

You are misrepresenting.

It seems to me that you see the problem with Calvinism

There's no problem with Calvinism. What I was taught matches with Scripture and matches with Spirit.

I'm Calvinistic not Calvinist, but I think it's just mainly myself using slightly different language to say the same thing... I'm not ye ole theological scholar, I'm a person who came to this faith 10 years ago from Islam.

I found beautiful people who love God and a beautiful and loving God... and I signed up to the party.

Believing in predestination isn't the same as believing what you keep claiming. Just because someone won't do something, doesn't mean they can't.

It just means they won't. Have you ever asked someone for help and had them say they don't feel like it? People can say no and still have an ability. Happens a lot on planet earth I imagine

People just don't want to repent. I didn't even want to I'm sure, I still have to daily beg God to take me and make me into something fit for His use. Daily daily because of the flesh.

But I have a God who isn't making me work my way into heaven. He did all the saving work.

I'm just working my way in absolute love of what He is...no other rhyme or reason, just love.

 

[Hazelelponi]

The fact of the matter is that I’m not saying that we shouldn’t or that we won’t glorify God because my question is based on the hypothetical validity of a heretical theology. my position is that we glorify God because of the nature of His character, not just because He’s the Creator and the most powerful being ever. It’s akin to saying if satan were the creator and the most powerful being would you glorify him? Should we praise him and worship satan based solely on the fact that he’s the creator and the most powerful being? No I believe we praise and worship God because of the nature of His character not just to save our own skin.

The only people who would call traditional Christianity heretical are the Catholics.

Are you Catholic?

If not this is pretty traditional Christianity. Check out the WCF and the LBCF... This is traditional Christianity.

The Westminster Confession of Faith - Ligonier Ministries

CHAPTER 1 Of the Holy Scripture Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence, do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of G

learn.ligonier.org

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith in Modern English - Founders Ministries

founders.org

What your calling heretical is a large chunk of Christians.

Here's some reading materials:

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/Double-Predestination.pdf

 

[Johan2222]

So you’re saying that according to these passages that we shouldn’t refute heresies? How would you apply these passages to the book of Galatians where Paul is refuting the heresy of mixing the law with grace throughout the entire book?

I could say many things, but man cannot learn wisdom by words alone. There have to be certain other things in place for somebody to be able to learn the truth. Hebrews 12.6-8.

Let me give you an example;

If Paul published a letter to the church openly in front of the whole world, and at the head of his letter, he put something like “Roman chariot Mark II fan” or “Greek marble villa fan”, the disciples would have had some pretty stern things to say to him about the truth John revealed in 1 John 2.15, and how he was stumbling not only the church, but the whole world.

Certainly, none of the disciples would have allowed Paul anywhere near their congregations to teach them anything, for fairly obvious reasons, though perhaps they aren’t that clear to you.

Having looked through some of your responses on this thread I can see that I am not alone in trying to convey things to you that you misinterpret.

If you do not answer the question, but infer meaning in it that is not there and then answer based upon that inference, all you are going to do is dissuade wise respondents from teaching you anything.

If you are repeatedly finding yourself unable to understand scriptures that people are trying to explain to you, maybe you should reconsider James 3.1.

What you have to understand is that the ability to discern scripture is not related to the capacity of our minds, but the measure of our humility, for God gives wisdom to the humble and resists the proud.

Moreover, if a man loves the things of the world, trying to explain anything to him in scripture is rather pointless, especially if he believes that the law is a doctrine of man.

1 John 2.15
1 Corinthians 13.2

 

[BNR32FAN]

Believing in predestination isn't the same as believing what you keep claiming. Just because someone won't do something, doesn't mean they can't.

It just means they won't. Have you ever asked someone for help and had them say they don't feel like it? People can say no and still have an ability. Happens a lot on planet earth I imagine

So then regeneration isn’t necessary for someone to repent?

 

[Hazelelponi]

So then regeneration isn’t necessary for someone to repent?

Yes it is.

I'm going to follow others out the door now. I wish you well .. God bless you, and give you peace.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The only people who would call traditional Christianity heretical are the Catholics.

Are you Catholic?

If not this is pretty traditional Christianity. Check out the WCF and the LBCF... This is traditional Christianity.

Traditional Christianity didn’t begin in the 16th century. And no I’m not Catholic.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes it is.

I'm going to follow others out the door now. I wish you well .. God bless you, and give you peace.

God bless you to.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I could say many things, but man cannot learn wisdom by words alone. There have to be certain other things in place for somebody to be able to learn the truth. Hebrews 12.6-8.

Let me give you an example;

If Paul published a letter to the church openly in front of the whole world, and at the head of his letter, he put something like “Roman chariot Mark II fan” or “Greek marble villa fan”, the disciples would have had some pretty stern things to say to him about the truth John revealed in 1 John 2.15, and how he was stumbling not only the church, but the whole world.

Certainly, none of the disciples would have allowed Paul anywhere near their congregations to teach them anything, for fairly obvious reasons, though perhaps they aren’t that clear to you.

Having looked through some of your responses on this thread I can see that I am not alone in trying to convey things to you that you misinterpret.

If you do not answer the question, but infer meaning in it that is not there and then answer based upon that inference, all you are going to do is dissuade wise respondents from teaching you anything.

If you are repeatedly finding yourself unable to understand scriptures that people are trying to explain to you, maybe you should reconsider James 3.1.

What you have to understand is that the ability to discern scripture is not related to the capacity of our minds, but the measure of our humility, for God gives wisdom to the humble and resists the proud.

Moreover, if a man loves the things of the world, trying to explain anything to him in scripture is rather pointless, especially if he believes that the law is a doctrine of man.

1 John 2.15
1 Corinthians 13.2

You didn’t answer the question. You’re telling me that according to the scriptures we’re not supposed to refute heretical theology but you can’t explain why Paul wrote an entire epistle to the Galatians refuting heretical theology.

Then you proceeded to imply that others in this thread have more knowledge than I do when I’ve been pointing out their errors by quoting scripture. If you’d like to actually discuss some of my explanations of the scriptures that would be more productive than simply saying that I’m wrong without demonstrating how my explanation is wrong. Just because there are more people that support Calvin’s theology in this thread than people who reject it doesn’t mean that their theology is correct. Surely if you were to go to a Jehovah’s Witness forum and were outnumbered that wouldn’t imply that their theology is correct either.

Previously you claimed that 2 Corinthians 6:14 says that we are supposed to abandon our loved ones if they aren’t a believer and when I pointed out that no one is born a believer so what do we do when our child is born an unbeliever, you didn’t reply to that question. After my bringing that evidence to the discussion do you still hold to the idea that we are not to associate with unbelievers?