Predestination Is God's Identification As The true and Living God

[Zaatar71]

Isa. 41.KJV
22 Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come.
23 Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together.
24 Behold, ye are of nothing, and your work of nought: an abomination is he that chooseth you.

Isa.41 Amp
22
Let them bring forward [their evidence] and tell us what is going to happen. Regarding the former events, tell what they were,
That we may consider them and know their outcome; Or announce to us the things that are going to come.
23
Tell us the things that are to come afterward,That we may know that you are gods;
Indeed, you should do something good or do evil, [c]that we may be afraid and fear [you] together [as we observe the miracle].
24
Hear this! You [idols] are less than nothing, And your work is worthless;
The worshiper who chooses you [as a god] is repulsive.

The true and Living God has ordained whatsoever comes to pass. The man made Idols are challenged to predict events that are certain to come to pass. Both the false idol., and the one who chooses such an idol...are repulsive!
God has Isaiah declare this for us.

Do you worship the True and Living God declared here, or...have you invented a false idol that you have created in your mind?

 

[Zaatar71]

God's people love the fact that God controls our eternal destiny. Isa.46:
For I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is no one like Me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things which have not been done,
Saying, ‘My plan will be established,
And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’;
11 Calling a bird of prey from the east,
The man of [k]My purpose from a distant country.
Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass.
I have planned it, I will certainly do it.

12 “Listen to Me, you stubborn-minded,
Who are far from righteousness.
13 I bring near My righteousness, it is not far off;
And My salvation will not delay.
And I will grant salvation in Zion,
And My glory for Israel.

 

[Zaatar71]

I came across this summary of believing thought:
RATIFIED IN THE NATIONAL SYNOD OF THE REFORMED CHURCH
Held at Dordrecht in the years 1618 and 1619

Article 8
There are not various decrees of election, but one and the same decree respecting all those who shall be saved, both
under the Old and New Testament; since the Scripture declares the good pleasure, purpose and counsel of the
divine will to be one, according to which He hath chosen us from eternity, both to grace and glory, to salvation and
the way of salvation, which He hath ordained that we should walk therein.
Article 9
This election was not founded upon foreseen faith, and the obedience of faith, holiness, or any other good quality
or disposition in man, as the prerequisite, cause or condition on which it depended; but men are chosen to faith and
to the obedience of faith, holiness, etc.; therefore election is the fountain of every saving good, from which
proceeds faith, holiness, and the other gifts of salvation, and finally eternal life itself, as its fruits and effects,
according to that of the apostle: “He hath chosen us [not because we were but] that we should be holy, and without
blame, before Him in love” (Eph. 1:4).
Article 10
The good pleasure of God is the sole cause of this gracious election, which doth not consist herein, that out of all
possible qualities and actions of men God has chosen some as a condition of salvation; but that He was pleased out
of the common mass of sinners to adopt some certain persons as a peculiar people to Himself, as it is written, “For
the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,” etc., it was said (namely to Rebecca): “The
elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” (Rom. 9:11-13). “And as
many as were ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48).

 

[Zaatar71]

It looks as if they really thought this issue out fully.
They tried to help those who struggle with these clear teachings to discover the joyful truth of God's eternal love!

Article 6
That some receive the gift of faith from God and others do not receive it proceeds from God's eternal decree, for
“known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15:18). “Who worketh all things after
the counsel of His own will” (Eph. 1:11).

According to which decree, He graciously softens the hearts of the elect,
however obstinate, and inclines them to believe, while He leaves the non-elect in His just judgment to their own
wickedness and obduracy.

And herein is especially displayed the profound, the merciful, and at the same time the righteous discrimination between men,
equally involved in ruin; or that decree of election and reprobation revealed in the Word of God,

which though men of perverse, impure and unstable minds wrest to their own destruction, yet
to holy and pious souls affords unspeakable consolation.

They point to why this is, and always will be a great comfort to the people of God!

 

[Ben1445]

It looks as if they really thought this issue out fully.
They tried to help those who struggle with these clear teachings to discover the joyful truth of God's eternal love!

These “clear teachings” are their own and don’t match Scripture.
There is only one outcome in this one decree.

but men are chosen to faith and
to the obedience of faith, holiness, etc.

(This is where I don’t see any difference between the people who say they are not Hyper-Calvinists, and those who are.)

Luke 13:34
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!

The one decree clearly doesn’t apply here. God is not decreeing that people come to Him. He is calling people to come to Him.
The passage quoted does talk about false gods but the context of these chapters is the deliverance of Israel from the enemies in the east.
The only Elect mentioned here is Jesus,

Isaiah 42:1
Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him:
he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

And Jacob…

Isaiah 45:4
For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect,
I have even called thee by thy name:
I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.

Because God chose/elected Jacob and his children to be His people.

The text is addressed to Cyrus. God isn’t telling Cyrus that God set him up for Christians. It is for the nation of Israel, the physical children of Jacob.

And Jesus…

Isaiah 65:9
And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob,
and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains:
and mine elect shall inherit it,
and my servants shall dwell there.

And those who are in Christ, the Elect, who are elect in Him, and inherit with Him in the new heaven and new earth…

Isaiah 65:22
They shall not build, and another inhabit;
they shall not plant, and another eat:
for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands

Article 6
That some receive the gift of faith

Grace is the gift. Faith is the vehicle.
“By grace are ye saved,” not “by faith are ye saved.”

from God and others do not receive it proceeds from God's eternal decree, for
“known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15:18). “Who worketh all things after
the counsel of His own will” (Eph. 1:11).

John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

These works are not the works of God.
I’ve no doubt that you will deny this is what you mean. I’m glad for that. But with only one decree, where did they come from. If everything happens by decree, then…?

According to which decree, He graciously softens the hearts of the elect,
however obstinate, and inclines them to believe,

Chapter and verse for this? Luke 13:34 says otherwise.

while He leaves the non-elect in His just judgment to their own
wickedness and obduracy.

And herein is especially displayed the profound, the merciful, and at the same time the righteous discrimination between men,
equally involved in ruin; or that decree of election and reprobation revealed in the Word of God,

which though men of perverse, impure and unstable minds wrest to their own destruction, yet
to holy and pious souls affords unspeakable consolation.

They point to why this is, and always will be a great comfort to the people of God!

This is not good news.

“Hello neighbor, I just want you to know that God loves some of us. If He doesn’t love you, you’re going to be judged for eternity and I find that comforting. God might not care about you but He wants me to tell you all this anyway. Won’t you join us in church this Sunday?”

You’re telling me that God sent us out with this message?

 

[Zaatar71]

These “clear teachings” are their own and don’t match Scripture.
There is only one outcome in this one decree.



(This is where I don’t see any difference between the people who say they are not Hyper-Calvinists, and those who are.)

Luke 13:34
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!

The one decree clearly doesn’t apply here. God is not decreeing that people come to Him. He is calling people to come to Him.
The passage quoted does talk about false gods but the context of these chapters is the deliverance of Israel from the enemies in the east.
The only Elect mentioned here is Jesus,

Isaiah 42:1
Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him:
he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

And Jacob…

Isaiah 45:4
For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect,
I have even called thee by thy name:
I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.

Because God chose/elected Jacob and his children to be His people.

The text is addressed to Cyrus. God isn’t telling Cyrus that God set him up for Christians. It is for the nation of Israel, the physical children of Jacob.

And Jesus…

Isaiah 65:9
And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob,
and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains:
and mine elect shall inherit it,
and my servants shall dwell there.

And those who are in Christ, the Elect, who are elect in Him, and inherit with Him in the new heaven and new earth…

Isaiah 65:22
They shall not build, and another inhabit;
they shall not plant, and another eat:
for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands


Grace is the gift. Faith is the vehicle.
“By grace are ye saved,” not “by faith are ye saved.”


John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

These works are not the works of God.
I’ve no doubt that you will deny this is what you mean. I’m glad for that. But with only one decree, where did they come from. If everything happens by decree, then…?

Chapter and verse for this? Luke 13:34 says otherwise.



This is not good news.

“Hello neighbor, I just want you to know that God loves some of us. If He doesn’t love you, you’re going to be judged for eternity and I find that comforting. God might not care about you but He wants me to tell you all this anyway. Won’t you join us in church this Sunday?”

You’re telling me that God sent us out with this message?

I will answer this in a couple of days, in detail. I have to be out early tomorrow.
You mention that only Jesus is elect, from what you can see.
Short answer is...The elect sinners are in Union with Him.
He is the Head of His Church. We are the body. We are in saving Union to Him.
Look in Ephesians, and take notice of all the times it says, IN CHRIST. hope that helps you

 

[Ben1445]

I will answer this in a couple of days, in detail. I have to be out early tomorrow.

I will probably not be back until Monday. No rush.

You mention that only Jesus is elect, from what you can see.

I thought I took that out. I was referring to Isaiah 42 in particular.
I expanded my search and found three categories there in the context of Isaiah. I did think that was clear. I named them for each verse.

Short answer is...The elect sinners are in Union with Him.

And the sky is blue. Say something not quite so obvious and address the problem underlying.

The short answer you didn’t say is that God doesn’t offer salvation to everyone.

He is the Head of His Church. We are the body. We are in saving Union to Him.
Look in Ephesians, and take notice of all the times it says, IN CHRIST. hope that helps you

I know believers are in Christ.

And those who are in Christ, the Elect, who are elect in Him, and inherit with Him in the new heaven and new earth…

Isaiah 65:22
They shall not build, and another inhabit;
they shall not plant, and another eat:
for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands

I know that I threw you off by my post. I am sorry. It does seem like you locked onto the statement you called out and didn’t hear the rest if you finished it.
I could appreciate a comment telling me I’m contradicting myself. It does appear that way.

Have a great weekend.

 

[Zaatar71]

These “clear teachings” are their own and don’t match Scripture.
There is only one outcome in this one decree.

Hello Ben, I am not sure why you feel that way? There is only one God so why would there be many different outcomes?

(This is where I don’t see any difference between the people who say they are not Hyper-Calvinists, and those who are.)

Luke 13:34
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!

This is spoken to the leadership, right?

The one decree clearly doesn’t apply here. God is not decreeing that people come to Him. He is calling people to come to Him.
The passage quoted does talk about false gods but the context of these chapters is the deliverance of Israel from the enemies in the east.
The only Elect mentioned here is Jesus,

Isaiah 42:1
Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him:
he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

Yes...This speaks of Jesus as the Elect servant, His identity, His person. But In the Servant songs we are told of His work, that is gathering all His children together In HIm. This is what is described as a saving Union! The verses of scripture form a complete revelation. They do not stand as isolated islands, all by themself.

And Jacob…

Isaiah 45:4
For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect,
I have even called thee by thy name:
I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.

Because God chose/elected Jacob and his children to be His people.

The texts in the Old testament spoke often to the nation of Israel, because they alone had the written revelation of God at that time.
rom.3:
3 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

The text is addressed to Cyrus. God isn’t telling Cyrus that God set him up for Christians. It is for the nation of Israel, the physical children of Jacob.

Yes, Historically it was speaking of Cyrus. Most of what we know as types were historical people. But in the Servant songs,,,it goes beyond the historical person of Cyrus.

And Jesus…

Isaiah 65:9
And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob,
and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains:
and mine elect shall inherit it,
and my servants shall dwell there.

And those who are in Christ, the Elect, who are elect in Him, and inherit with Him in the new heaven and new earth…

We learn here that there are an elect remnant out of Israel, In the Nt fulfillment we see God chooses from not only Israel, but from among gentiles scattered throughout the nations not Israel only!

Isaiah 65:22
They shall not build, and another inhabit;
they shall not plant, and another eat:
for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands


Grace is the gift. Faith is the vehicle.
“By grace are ye saved,” not “by faith are ye saved.”


John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

These works are not the works of God.
I’ve no doubt that you will deny this is what you mean. I’m glad for that. But with only one decree, where did they come from. If everything happens by decree, then…?

Chapter and verse for this? Luke 13:34 says otherwise.



This is not good news.

“Hello neighbor, I just want you to know that God loves some of us

Look at how you ask this statement, how you frame it! It seems as if you think by mocking the biblical position, you will do away with it?

you say,,,"God loves some of us" The idea you would suggest is that God loves all men savingly, when the bible is clear that he does not.
Paul says God came to save sinners...He left it open ended;
1Tim.1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Notice, He never says, God intends to save all! he says save sinners, plural. more than one, multitudes.

. If He doesn’t love you, you’re going to be judged for eternity and I find that comforting. God might not care about you but He wants me to tell you all this anyway. Won’t you join us in church this Sunday?”

Again, this seems to try and mock the true message...how about asking ;
Jesus said all the Fathers gives to Him, shall come to Him. Jn6:37- Then ask, have you come to Jesus yet?

You’re telling me that God sent us out with this message?

the message we present, could be the subject of yet another thread.

 

[Zaatar71]

I will probably not be back until Monday. No rush.

Okay, that's fine.

I thought I took that out. I was referring to Isaiah 42 in particular.
I expanded my search and found three categories there in the context of Isaiah. I did think that was clear. I named them for each verse.

Yes isa. 42 has a context, but it is not divorced from the rest of Isaiah, or the whole bible.

And the sky is blue. Say something not quite so obvious and address the problem underlying.

The short answer you didn’t say is that God doesn’t offer salvation to everyone.

I know believers are in Christ.

Ben, looking back we can say in hindsight, believers are "in Christ"
Scripture speaks of God viewing the unsaved elect sinners, while they were unsaved, as being Chosen in their unsaved state, to be the objects of God's eternal love.
Rom5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

I know that I threw you off by my post. I am sorry. It does seem like you locked onto the statement you called out and didn’t hear the rest if you finished it.
I could appreciate a comment telling me I’m contradicting myself. It does appear that way.

Have a great weekend.

Sometimes we post past each other, because we are not sure of what is being said. We need to clarify sometimes.

 

[Ben1445]

Okay, that's fine.

Yes isa. 42 has a context, but it is not divorced from the rest of Isaiah, or the whole bible.


Ben, looking back we can say in hindsight, believers are "in Christ"
Scripture speaks of God viewing the unsaved elect sinners, while they were unsaved, as being Chosen in their unsaved state, to be the objects of God's eternal love.
Rom5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

You add meaning to the interpretation that is not there.
God commended His love towards us doesn’t say that God only loves people who he chose to decide to coerce to be saved.
It does say that God commends His love towards us doesn’t sinners. All men are sinners. It is still available to all.
The context is not saying God commended His love towards the chosen. The focus is on what kinds of people God loves. It is not the good men, it is the sinners.
I am not saying, nor ever have said, that it is by our own strength that we save ourselves. Somehow, when I say God offers salvation to every person, I end up being told that I cannot save myself. I don’t understand this correlation.
In short, you’re adding Calvin context to the Scripture here.

 

[Ben1445]

Hello Ben, I am not sure why you feel that way? There is only one God so why would there be many different outcomes?

If we are offered a choice, there is the possibility of different outcomes. I’m not sure why that is hard to figure out.

This is spoken to the leadership, right?

Because Jesus only wanted the leadership?

Why would you think that?

Yes...This speaks of Jesus as the Elect servant, His identity, His person. But In the Servant songs we are told of His work, that is gathering all His children together In HIm. This is what is described as a saving Union! The verses of scripture form a complete revelation. They do not stand as isolated islands, all by themself.

The texts in the Old testament spoke often to the nation of Israel, because they alone had the written revelation of God at that time.
rom.3:
3 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Yes, Historically it was speaking of Cyrus. Most of what we know as types were historical people. But in the Servant songs,,,it goes beyond the historical person of Cyrus.

We learn here that there are an elect remnant out of Israel, In the Nt fulfillment we see God chooses from not only Israel, but from among gentiles scattered throughout the nations not Israel only!

Look at how you ask this statement, how you frame it! It seems as if you think by mocking the biblical position, you will do away with it?

I have the biblical position. Yours is the Calvinist position.
And that is as good as your argument.
Do you think that saying l am against Scripture makes me that way?
But since you feel that this is a good argument, I will use it too.
Do you think that if you claim that what Jesus said is unbiblical you will do away with it?

you say,,,"God loves some of us" The idea you would suggest is that God loves all men savingly, when the bible is clear that he does not.

Your position is not as clear as you think. You think that if God loves someone “saving,” they will be forced by time and circumstance to respond to Him.
What Scripture says is that God loves all men and offers all people salvation. Some people reject God’s saving love. This is the part of the Bible that is not divorced from the rest of Scripture except in the Calvinist view. Somehow, these Scriptures don’t apply the way they are written, but in the way that Calvin applies them is okay.

Prob. 1:22-25
Turn you at my reproof:
behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you,
I will make known my words unto you.
Because I have called, and ye refused;
I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
But ye have set at nought all my counsel,
and would none of my reproof:

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Matthew 9:13
But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

John 13:1
Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.

John 1:10-12
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

But somehow, a Calvinist thinks that receiving something that God gives (and tells us to receive) is saving ourselves.
Imagine a drowning man saying to the lifeguard, “I won’t take your hand because I don’t want anyone to think I saved myself.”

Paul says God came to save sinners...He left it open ended;
1Tim.1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Notice, He never says, God intends to save all! he says save sinners, plural. more than one, multitudes.

He never said that God didn’t want to save all.
He did say that God would like all to be saved.

1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

God, who loves mercy, and is rich in mercy, offers it to all.
Paul did say,

Ephesians 4:18
Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

Not because they were not elect. It is because they have given themselves over to blindness. Read Ephesians 1.
I hope this helps you understand.

Again, this seems to try and mock the true message...

It mocks yours.
Yours is not biblical.
Read and rightly apply the Scripture included in this post.

how about asking ;
Jesus said all the Fathers gives to Him, shall come to Him. Jn6:37- Then ask, have you come to Jesus yet?

I just was wasn’t sugar coating your “gospel” like you do. I was being honest.

the message we present, could be the subject of yet another thread.

The message we present should be what we were instructed.

Mark 16:15
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

1 Tim. 2:3-6
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

 

[Zaatar71]

You add meaning to the interpretation that is not there.

Let's investigate that a bit, okay? One reason why we might be coming to different conclusions is I think the meaning is derived straight from the text. Would it be okay If I show you from the text?

God commended His love towards us doesn’t say that God only loves people who he chose to decide to coerce to be saved.

Okay, you raise a question. What does this text say, and who are the objects of this text, is it all men ever born, or does the text inform us as to who it is?

It does say that God commends His love towards us doesn’t sinners. All men are sinners. It is still available to all.

If you Isolate this verse from the surrounding verses, your idea would seem to have more merit, but I think we can discover that when taken in context...it restricts or conditions who are those who benefit from this! let's look-

The context is not saying God commended His love towards the chosen.

You say this however, what if it is exactly what it is saying, only it puts it in different terms than you are using?

The focus is on what kinds of people God loves. It is not the good men, it is the sinners.

Okay, let's begin to solve the puzzle. Romans 5 is addressing a select group of people. let's start in 5:1
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
Can we agree that he is speaking of those who have been justified by faith? Speaking of that "group" he says.. WE have peace with God.

You had just said; [The context is not saying God commended His love towards the chosen.]
let me suggest to you that the context is saying this...Justified=Elect. Justifed Elect=peace with God!

Before you react against what I am suggesting, ask yourself this; Are the unbelievers in the world justified? Do they at this moment have peace with God? If they do not, and the answer is no, then let me suggest, that the text of Romans 5 is showing a contrast between the unsaved, unjustified world, and the Elect who are justified, and have peace with God....ben, let me suggest that you read over the first two verses, about 5-6 times, and see what it declares. Once you do that work through all the verses down to vs,11 and see if this is what is being indicated!

I am not saying, nor ever have said, that it is by our own strength that we save ourselves.

ok, we agree on that.

Somehow, when I say God offers salvation to every person, I end up being told that I cannot save myself. I don’t understand this correlation.
In short, you’re adding Calvin context to the Scripture here.

Now you raise two related but separate issues.
1] the free offer of the gospel
2] does the texts here favor a Calvinistic interpretations ?

Ben, Let me suggest something here. Try and see when the various Calvinists suggest what they see in scripture, try and view it as if it is what is taught and try to be able to give an accurate presentation of the view, before you just oppose it , on a sort of knee -jerk reaction.
Whether you believe it or not, just see if you could explain what the calvinists claim to see, before trying to close the door on it.

 

[Ben1445]

Let's investigate that a bit, okay? One reason why we might be coming to different conclusions is I think the meaning is derived straight from the text. Would it be okay If I show you from the text?

Okay, you raise a question. What does this text say, and who are the objects of this text, is it all men ever born, or does the text inform us as to who it is?

If you Isolate this verse from the surrounding verses, your idea would seem to have more merit, but I think we can discover that when taken in context...it restricts or conditions who are those who benefit from this! let's look-

You say this however, what if it is exactly what it is saying, only it puts it in different terms than you are using?


Okay, let's begin to solve the puzzle. Romans 5 is addressing a select group of people. let's start in 5:1
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
Can we agree that he is speaking of those who have been justified by faith? Speaking of that "group" he says.. WE have peace with God.

You had just said; [The context is not saying God commended His love towards the chosen.]
let me suggest to you that the context is saying this...Justified=Elect. Justifed Elect=peace with God!

Before you react against what I am suggesting, ask yourself this; Are the unbelievers in the world justified? Do they at this moment have peace with God? If they do not, and the answer is no, then let me suggest, that the text of Romans 5 is showing a contrast between the unsaved, unjustified world, and the Elect who are justified, and have peace with God....ben, let me suggest that you read over the first two verses, about 5-6 times, and see what it declares. Once you do that work through all the verses down to vs,11 and see if this is what is being indicated!


ok, we agree on that.

Now you raise two related but separate issues.
1] the free offer of the gospel
2] does the texts here favor a Calvinistic interpretations ?

Ben, Let me suggest something here. Try and see when the various Calvinists suggest what they see in scripture, try and view it as if it is what is taught and try to be able to give an accurate presentation of the view, before you just oppose it , on a sort of knee -jerk reaction.
Whether you believe it or not, just see if you could explain what the calvinists claim to see, before trying to close the door on it.

I’ll investigate here.
You let me know when you understand 2 Timothy 2:4

 

[Zaatar71]

If we are offered a choice, there is the possibility of different outcomes. I’m not sure why that is hard to figure out.

Allow me a carnal illustration; You can freely offer a person to be the starting third basemen spot on your softball team for this upcoming Saturday. You can say he has a "choice". However if you make a sincere offer to the person, but it winds up he is incarcerated at the local jail, he might choose to say yes, but the fact he is bound by the jail cell might not allow him to follow up on it. Nothing wrong with your free offer, but the person himself is not "free" to participate, even if he did want to. he would have to be set free, to participate.

Because Jesus only wanted the leadership?

Why would you think that?

No, he was addressing the leadership, who was hindering others from coming to him.

I have the biblical position. Yours is the Calvinist position.

Ben, everyone who posts "thinks" they have the biblical position. One of us does not have it, however. You suggest you have it,lol, but what if you do not? How would you know?

And that is as good as your argument.
Do you think that saying l am against Scripture makes me that way?

If either one of us departs from scripture we are in trouble, right?

But since you feel that this is a good argument, I will use it too.
Do you think that if you claim that what Jesus said is unbiblical you will do away with it?

What Jesus said is always biblical, our understanding might miss the mark however!

Your position is not as clear as you think. You think that if God loves someone “saving,” they will be forced by time and circumstance to respond to Him.

No, I think that God works in the unsaved elect persons, to make them effectually willing, not by force, but by His love revealed to a new heart given to that unsaved elect person.

What Scripture says is that God loves all men and offers all people salvation.

This is just not so, and is easily disproven from scripture. In what way did God desire the salvation of Pharaohs soldiers when he drowned them all in the red Sea? Did Moses go over the 4 spiritual laws, or the romans road with them? Explain How God made that offer to them, or the firstborn in the land who were slain?

Some people reject God’s saving love.

Ben, ALL people reject God's love, unless and until God makes them willing.

This is the part of the Bible that is not divorced from the rest of Scripture except in the Calvinist view. Somehow, these Scriptures don’t apply the way they are written, but in the way that Calvin applies them is okay.

The Calvinist looks at the verses in context of all the verses offered. It finds the truth from scripture that does not contradict other verses.

Prob. 1:22-25
Turn you at my reproof:
behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you,
I will make known my words unto you.
Because I have called, and ye refused;
I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
But ye have set at nought all my counsel,
and would none of my reproof:

yes, this shows men who are bound by sin, apart from God dealing with them on a heart level.

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Matthew 9:13
But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

John 13:1
Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.

John 1:10-12
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

But somehow, a Calvinist thinks that receiving something that God gives (and tells us to receive) is saving ourselves.
Imagine a drowning man saying to the lifeguard, “I won’t take your hand because I don’t want anyone to think I saved myself.”

He never said that God didn’t want to save all.
He did say that God would like all to be saved.

1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

God, who loves mercy, and is rich in mercy, offers it to all.

A great list of verses, but the wrong conclusion.

Paul did say,

Ephesians 4:18
Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

Not because they were not elect. It is because they have given themselves over to blindness. Read Ephesians 1.
I hope this helps you understand.

It mocks yours.
Yours is not biblical.
Read and rightly apply the Scripture included in this post.

I just was wasn’t sugar coating your “gospel” like you do. I was being honest.

Right back at you! I can show how you are inconsistent. Answer me on the Egyptian soldiers, who were drowned under the judgment of God.

The message we present should be what we were instructed.

Mark 16:15
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

1 Tim. 2:3-6
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

yes, I like and use these verses all the time, and do so from a Cal viewpoint.

 

[Zaatar71]

I’ll investigate here.
You let me know when you understand 2 Timothy 2:4

I do know, all men...look at who Paul describes;
2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

2 [For kings,
and for all that are in authority;]

that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4 Who will have all men to be saved,
All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born.

 

[Ben1445]

Allow me a carnal illustration; You can freely offer a person to be the starting third basemen spot on your softball team for this upcoming Saturday. You can say he has a "choice". However if you make a sincere offer to the person, but it winds up he is incarcerated at the local jail, he might choose to say yes, but the fact he is bound by the jail cell might not allow him to follow up on it. Nothing wrong with your free offer, but the person himself is not "free" to participate, even if he did want to. he would have to be set free, to participate.

So God has put the unsavable in spiritual jail and stops them from participating in the free choice He offers. this falls under the category of deception and is at the very worst a poor illustration.
it is a great argument against Calvinism.

No, he was addressing the leadership, who was hindering others from coming to him.

It doesn't matter for the sake of the argument who He was talking to. Jesus wanted them. They did not want Him.

Ben, everyone who posts "thinks" they have the biblical position. One of us does not have it, however. You suggest you have it,lol, but what if you do not? How would you know?

I have Scripture. I use Scripture. I study Scripture. I read what others write about Scripture. The lying god that Calvinism purposes to represent as the true God makes your position ridiculous. Laugh at me if you wish, but look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself the same questions.

Let me offer you the work of Calvin as a testimony against him.


"Let us, however, see why it is that he mentions only the unbelieving; for he seems to say, that Christ in spirit appeared to those who formerly were unbelieving; but I understand him otherwise, that then the true servants of God were mixed together with the unbelieving, and were almost hidden on account of their number. I allow that the Greek construction is at variance with this meaning, for Peter, if he meant this, ought to have used the genitive case absolute. But as it was not unusual with the Apostles to put one case instead of another, and as we see that Peter here heaps together many things, and no other suitable meaning can be elicited, I have no hesitation in giving this explanation of this intricate passage; so that readers may understand that those called unbelieving are different from those to whom he said the Gospel was preached.


These are statements that I expect of a cult leader who is putting his own beliefs into a text.
Silly, unlearned Peter. If he had only been educated and not spent so much time with the fish. Then he would have been able to properly correct the Holy Spirit and put the words in that Calvin prefers. (sarcasm)
Calvin didn't learn from Scripture. He put his own meanings on it and corrected the greek where he didn't like it.

This is not the kind of commentary that I frequently study for good knowledge. I prefer people who believe what the Holy Spirit said. I have little respect for those who correct Him.

If either one of us departs from scripture we are in trouble, right?

correct. I feel the same way about Calvin.

What Jesus said is always biblical, our understanding might miss the mark however!

Calvin's does as shown above by his correction of the Holy Spirit.

No, I think that God works in the unsaved elect persons, to make them effectually willing, not by force, but by His love revealed to a new heart given to that unsaved elect person.

make them willing, force them coerce them by circumstance, it is all the same.

What Scripture says is that God loves all men and offers all people salvation.

This is just not so, and is easily disproven from scripture. In what way did God desire the salvation of Pharaohs soldiers when he drowned them all in the red Sea? Did Moses go over the 4 spiritual laws, or the romans road with them? Explain How God made that offer to them, or the firstborn in the land who were slain?

When Paul said "all men," he was talking about all men.
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Ben, ALL people reject God's love, unless and until God makes them willing.

forcing people to be saved again. and by extension, forcing the rest into sin.

The Calvinist looks at the verses in context of all the verses offered.

this is not true.

It finds the truth from scripture that does not contradict other verses.

Or redefines it as Calvin does. See above.

yes, this shows men who are bound by sin, apart from God dealing with them on a heart level.

A great list of verses, but the wrong conclusion.

Right back at you! I can show how you are inconsistent. Answer me on the Egyptian soldiers, who were drowned under the judgment of God.

they could have left with the Israelites. there were other people aside from Israel that left Egypt. They could have put the blood on their doors.
salvation was available. God didn't say that He would save those whose doors He applied the blood to. He told the people to apply the blood to their doors.
not inconsistent at all.

yes, I like and use these verses all the time, and do so from a Cal viewpoint.

which is why they are twisted before they leave your mouth. try using them from a Scriptural viewpoint and do it without Calvin who did not believe Scripture meant what it said.

 

[Ben1445]

I do know, all men...look at who Paul describes;
2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

2 [For kings,
and for all that are in authority;]

that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4 Who will have all men to be saved,
All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born.

When Paul says "all men," he doesn't mean some of all. He means all men.

Why do Calvinists hate people?

 

[Zaatar71]

So God has put the unsavable in spiritual jail and stops them from participating in the free choice He offers. this falls under the category of deception and is at the very worst a poor illustration.

While it might be a poor illustration, I think you mischaracterize it, you say.. God has put the" Unsavable in spiritual jail.." How about we look at it biblically, SIN has put all men in bondage as Jesus taught in Jn8. BLAME SIN, NOT God!

it is a great argument against Calvinism.

No, it demonstrates the biblical teaching of total depravity quite well.

It doesn't matter for the sake of the argument who He was talking to. Jesus wanted them. They did not want Him.

Sorry Ben, Jesus seeks and saves that which was lost, he does not "try and save them", he actually saves all those elect sheep given to Him. He is not willing that any are lost, but that all come to repentance, 2pet.3:9

I have Scripture. I use Scripture. I study Scripture. I read what others write about Scripture.

I think you do these things, but do not think you are consistent yet.

The lying god that Calvinism

What if the God of Calvinism, is exactly who the Calvinists say he is? That is the true and living God ? Where would that leave your statement? would you be like Paul who said he thought he needed to do many things contrary to the Chrisitan God, ?

purposes to represent as the true God makes your position ridiculous.

Millions of confessional Christians have not found these truths to be ridiculous!

Laugh at me if you wish, but look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself the same questions.

Ben, it does me no go to "laugh at you". I take it that you are a serious student of God's word. I would not try and help if I thought you were not.

Let me offer you the work of Calvin as a testimony against him.

Ben, before you do, can I ask you, have you read Calvin, at all? or have you just read anti- cal websites? have you looked at the Institutes? Have you read any part of His commentaries? I have not read all of his material, and in fact, most current Calvinists have not read much of His writings. We do not need to as we see many of the things he saw in his bible, we see it also. I believed much of what I believe now before I had any real idea of who Calvin was.

"Let us, however, see why it is that he mentions only the unbelieving; for he seems to say, that Christ in spirit appeared to those who formerly were unbelieving; but I understand him otherwise, that then the true servants of God were mixed together with the unbelieving, and were almost hidden on account of their number. I allow that the Greek construction is at variance with this meaning, for Peter, if he meant this, ought to have used the genitive case absolute. But as it was not unusual with the Apostles to put one case instead of another, and as we see that Peter here heaps together many things, and no other suitable meaning can be elicited, I have no hesitation in giving this explanation of this intricate passage; so that readers may understand that those called unbelieving are different from those to whom he said the Gospel was preached.


These are statements that I expect of a cult leader who is putting his own beliefs into a text.
Silly, unlearned Peter. If he had only been educated and not spent so much time with the fish. Then he would have been able to properly correct the Holy Spirit and put the words in that Calvin prefers. (sarcasm)
Calvin didn't learn from Scripture. He put his own meanings on it and corrected the greek where he didn't like it.

I am not sure you have made that case yet!

This is not the kind of commentary that I frequently study for good knowledge. I prefer people who believe what the Holy Spirit said. I have little respect for those who correct Him.

Who wrote as much at an early age, that was more on target than Calvin? I do not believe everything he wrote or I would be a presbyterian.I am not under any obligation to believe what any man wrote, unless proved from scripture.

correct. I feel the same way about Calvin.

Calvin's does as shown above by his correction of the Holy Spirit.

make them willing, force them coerce them by circumstance, it is all the same.

No Ben, that is an over reaction on your part.

When Paul said "all men," he was talking about all men.
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Really? So the omnipotent God wants ALL MEN to be saved. Salvation ifs of the Lord, and yet, he cannot save them somehow? Good luck with that conclusion. Are you a universalist?

forcing people to be saved again. and by extension, forcing the rest into sin.

No..this is you carnal reasoning avoiding the teaching as set forth in confessional churches.

this is not true.

Or redefines it as Calvin does. See above.

they could have left with the Israelites. there were other people aside from Israel that left Egypt. They could have put the blood on their doors.
salvation was available. God didn't say that He would save those whose doors He applied the blood to. He told the people to apply the blood to their doors.
not inconsistent at all.

which is why they are twisted before they leave your mouth. try using them from a Scriptural viewpoint and do it without Calvin who did not believe Scripture meant what it said.

I have not read calvin on this ,at all. So why do you suggest I have? Is that for you to avoid the real issues from scripture.

 

[Ben1445]

Let's investigate that a bit, okay? One reason why we might be coming to different conclusions is I think the meaning is derived straight from the text. Would it be okay If I show you from the text?

and isolate it from the rest of the Bible?? Whatever suits your argument the best, I suppose.

Okay, you raise a question. What does this text say, and who are the objects of this text, is it all men ever born, or does the text inform us as to who it is?

You have biased the question intentionally. You have already decided that the two options you gave are opposed to each other. What if the text informs us that all men ever born, are the objects of this text? You have excluded this possibility and before we argue the point, let's assume it is the right position. you will miss it because for you, it is not an option.
Let's start on an even plane to be honest with ourselves.
I'll rephrase your question for you.
What does this text say, and who are the objects of this text, does the text inform us as to who it is? Is it all men ever born, or not?

If you Isolate this verse from the surrounding verses, your idea would seem to have more merit, but I think we can discover that when taken in context...it restricts or conditions who are those who benefit from this! let's look-

LET'S LOOK- (absolutely)


Ro 5:1 ¶
Ro 5:2
Ro 5:3
Ro 5:4
Ro 5:5

Absolutely, the first five verses in the first paragraph talk about believers.

Ro 5:6 ¶

The "we," who are believers, are added into a different group. Believers are not the ungodly. This clearly is talking about believers when they were not believers. The real question is, are these exclusively unbelieving future believers or are they included in the unbelieving ungodly?
The question remains at this point. Let's keep going.

Ro 5:7
Ro 5:8

Yes, the letter is addressed "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints," (Rom.1:7).
That Jesus died for believers is not in question. Who is described as ungodly(v.6), and sinners (v.8) is the question.
There is still nothing new added in this. The question remains.

Ro 5:9

I agree that not all people are justified. Scripture is clear that there are unbelievers who are judged.
the people that are justified are not all people.
The question remains.

Ro 5:10
Ro 5:11

Here is that other group of people again. Enemies. Now has Christ died for all the enemies or just the enemies who He selected?
Again, nothing extra is added. there is still the possibility that while "we" were the enemies, "we" were offered reconciliation with the rest of the enemies, or is this invitation exclusive to the selected?

Ro 5:12

The Calvinist mut break from His definition of all in this verse. If he does not, He merely believes that

All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born

have sinned and are under the penalty of death. It would be glaringly wrong for the Calvinist not to break from his adopted definition imposed on the text at this point. My question is why does the Calvinist have to carry two definitions for the word all?

Ro 5:13
Ro 5:14

These verses include both the "future believer" and the "never believer" into the same group. Death reigned means that all were under the same condemnation and without hope.


Ro 5:15
Ro 5:16

Here is a difference made between salvation and sin. "Not as." This means that sin and salvation have different effects. Sin and death are on all men because all sin. Because we have sinned, we are judged. We reap what we sow. Salvation on the other hand is a gift and we reap it where we don't sow. They are different.
But there are similarities at the same time. Many were made sinners and many were made righteous. Surely, it could have said all were made sinners but many made righteous, especially since few there be that go in thereat and not many. There is a bit of poetry of words here. Many are sinners and many are righteous tells us that the gift applies to the group and not merely a selection out of the group. the application of the gift is dependent rather on acceptance of the gift over just being included in a group by description.
Many=Many. Sin affects many, gift affects the same group of many. Qualifiers follow in the next verses.

Ro 5:17

The saved are described as they which receive and not described as they which are elect. (election is for adoption see Romans 8 for adoption context with election)(Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.)

Ro 5:18

This passage gives no statement of "Not as." Again, all=all. Judgement came to all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born") men. In the same way, all=all, the righteousness of one is able to affect all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born") men.
The question is answered. Christ's offer of salvation extends as far as the offense.
You would need to finish the paragraph to understand this answer.

Ro 5:19

Many =many. The obedience reaches as far as the disobedience. Again, verse 17 gives a qualifier. the grace must be received, not like the curse of a punch in the face that you didn't ask for, or like the blessing of the shower given to the college roommate forced into the shower because he does not know what soap is. It is offered as a gift. Revelation 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Ro 5:20
Ro 5:21

We are given once more the extent of the reach of God's Grace. "As sin reigned." It came on all men. in the same way, as sin reigned, grace "might" reign through righteousness. Note that it does not say that grace will reign. it says it can. if it can, it is for all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born")

Do you believe Scripture? or do you have your own "Calvinist glasses" interpretation?
can you read Scripture without doing this thing you say you do?

I like and use these verses all the time, and do so from a Cal viewpoint.

Can you drop Calvin and read Scripture?

You say this however, what if it is exactly what it is saying, only it puts it in different terms than you are using?

I ask you to apply the same logic to yourself.

Okay, let's begin... ...and see if this is what is being indicated!

I will let the above discourse on the chapter answer this. I recommend finishing the paragraph (in and of Scripture) before answering.
Please read and reread the whole two paragraphs in chapter 5. Do it as many times as you have to. Pray about it and ask God to show you what are the limits of His mercy and grace.

Now you raise two related but separate issues.
1] the free offer of the gospel
2] does the texts here favor a Calvinistic interpretations ?

Ben, Let me suggest something here. Try and see when the various Calvinists suggest what they see in scripture, try and view it as if it is what is taught and try to be able to give an accurate presentation of the view, before you just oppose it , on a sort of knee -jerk reaction.

I have done this before. I stop when Calvin begins to say "The Holy Spirit used the wrong word, like usual."

Whether you believe it or not, just see if you could explain what the calvinists claim to see, before trying to close the door on it.

There are too many things that Calvinists cannot explain. Using Scripture, I cannot be honest with myself and the text and claim to see the same things.
Let's not pull a bit out of one paragraph and a bit out of another paragraph and change the meanings of what is said by merging two thoughts into the same.

 

[Ben1445]

While it might be a poor illustration, I think you mischaracterize it, you say.. God has put the" Unsavable in spiritual jail.." How about we look at it biblically, SIN has put all men in bondage as Jesus taught in Jn8. BLAME SIN, NOT God!

The Logical conclusion is that God continues to make sinners who have no hope. It is not a Scriptural view, but it follows the Calvinits viewpoint unavoidably whether you like it or don't.

No, it demonstrates the biblical teaching of total depravity quite well.

Especially through the calvinist lens.

Sorry Ben, Jesus seeks and saves that which was lost, he does not "try and save them", he actually saves all those elect sheep given to Him. He is not willing that any are lost, but that all come to repentance, 2pet.3:9

If that is the way you want to put it, God did try to save them. They refused His gift, His being and authority, and the only way to the Father.
But you are indeed posting right past me again, spouting more calvinist doctrine. 2 Peter says nothing about sheep.

I think you do these things, but do not think you are consistent yet.

if being Calvinist is what makes the measure of consistency, you are in a cult and I will never be.

What if the God of Calvinism, is exactly who the Calvinists say he is? That is the true and living God ? Where would that leave your statement? would you be like Paul who said he thought he needed to do many things contrary to the Chrisitan God, ?

Look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself the same questions against calvinism.

Millions of confessional Christians have not found these truths to be ridiculous!

And millions have!!

Ben, it does me no go to "laugh at you". I take it that you are a serious student of God's word. I would not try and help if I thought you were not.

I agree. Don't do it?

You suggest you have it,lol, but what if you do not?

??

Ben, before you do, can I ask you, have you read Calvin, at all? or have you just read anti- cal websites? have you looked at the Institutes? Have you read any part of His commentaries? I have not read all of his material, and in fact, most current Calvinists have not read much of His writings. We do not need to as we see many of the things he saw in his bible, we see it also. I believed much of what I believe now before I had any real idea of who Calvin was.

I actually don't believe Calvin was as much a Calvinist as today's Calvinists. I don't believe it because of how much of his works i have read.
yes. I have read quite a bit of Calvin's work. I use many Calvinistic believing commentaries. I don't spend any time on anti-cal websites for their anti-cal works. I have Scripture for that. I have read several anti-cal books. they didn't change my opinion. Yes I have read plenty of his institutes.
I quoted his commentary from the commentary and didn't need a website to tell me that he said that.
I have not read all his work nor do I plan to. I am not following him. I don't completely ignore him, but I am not following him.

I am not sure you have made that case yet!

This is a solid defense of the writings of calvin!! (sarcasm)

Who wrote as much at an early age, that was more on target than Calvin? I do not believe everything he wrote or I would be a presbyterian.I am not under any obligation to believe what any man wrote, unless proved from scripture.

Does it matter? Your saying that Calvin was on target does not make it so. I am glad that you expect to hear Scripture first. I have met too many "sola Scriptura" Calvinists who have never quoted anything but "Sola Calvina."

No Ben, that is an over reaction on your part.

It is not an overreaction. if there are no other options, you are forced to do what you have to do. If you can't handle the reality of the words you use, don't use them.

Really? So the omnipotent God wants ALL MEN to be saved. Salvation ifs of the Lord, and yet, he cannot save them somehow? Good luck with that conclusion. Are you a universalist?

Really?? God wants men to be sinners and to sin and do wrong so He gives them no other option? If God is creating sinners so they can sin, then God is the author of it. God says He does not tempt any man. Man must have a choice then.
Here we go with the "you are holding to false doctrines because you disagree with me."
I disagreed with someone else and they called me a calvinist.
You don't listen. I have explained the conclusion. you are only interested that I see it your way. You make no attempt to see the other side. It is a far jump from calvinism to universalism. in order to get that far, you must also jump over statements that I have made that should prevent you from making that application. this is a theatrics argument. this is an overreaction.

No..this is you carnal reasoning avoiding the teaching as set forth in confessional churches.

I don't care for the statements of faith and summarizations of Scripture that are given to us by earlier churches. I don't say they were wrong for having them. I think we are wrong for following them.
You may keep your Private Calvinist interpretations. I want nothing to do with them. They are not Scriptural.

I have not read calvin on this ,at all. So why do you suggest I have? Is that for you to avoid the real issues from scripture.

You claim to be calvinist. I did not say you were his parrot. You suggested that you do your Scripture reading from the Calvinist viewpoint, not me. I merely dropped the "ist" from Calvin. Since you use his name, I assumed you follow him.
This is the way I understand the conversation progressing.

yes, I like and use these verses all the time, and do so from a Cal viewpoint.

which is why they are twisted before they leave your mouth. try using them from a Scriptural viewpoint and do it without Calvin who did not believe Scripture meant what it said.

I have not read calvin on this ,at all. So why do you suggest I have? Is that for you to avoid the real issues from scripture.

When I said that Calvin did not believe Scripture, I did it showing where he corrected the Greek to match his beliefs.
I am in no way suggesting that you know everything about calvin.
It is not avoiding the issue. it is confronting the elephant in the room. Calvinism is a theology that bases it's teaching on the teachings of Calvin. (In case that is not clear) Calvin Corrected the Greek texts. His doctrines are doctrines based in philosophy and not Scripture.