Reasons Why Professed Christians Fail To See or Grasp The Doctrines Of Grace

[Dave G]

4] True spiritual understanding comes by The Spirit of God.

9] Sadly some who profess to be Christians, are still men of flesh, natural and unsaved, so truth will not be found in them

To me, these are the main reasons that the Bible is misunderstood by so many who profess to be Christians...
They simply do not have the Spirit of God in them to show them the truths that are found in every word of Scripture.

 

[Silverhair]

Here, SH, fails to understand the terms he is using. As we have explained to him before Foreknowledge is in relation to persons, those elected by God before the world was. He seeks to avoid this truth by travelling to Omniscience as we have pointed out this error in other threads. SH repeats the same error, and expects a different result. It is not going to happen.

Oh I forgot I do not have my Calvi dictionary on hand.

See there is just another of your many failures ZA. You keep reading your religion into the bible rather than get your theology from the bible.

You are under the delusion that calvinism is the standard by which the word of God should be understood. Oh you silly man.

I repeat the same truths in the hope that you will realize the failure of your man-made religion and turn to the real God of the bible.

 

[Silverhair]

I do. I arrived at 4 of the points as an atheist attending a Wesleyan Holiness church and reading the Bible to try and understand this whole Christianity thing … so whatever Augustine or John might have discovered, I doubt it was taught from the pulpit of the Church of God (Anderson, Indiana).

Then whatever church you were attending must have had quite a bit of calvinist religion in there teaching.

 

[Silverhair]

1]Here SH confesses he has tried to look at what He describes as Calvinist websites, but yet for several of the 15vreasons we have listed, he cannot see it.
2] Here he repeats the Augustine/pagan philosophy excuse. Truth will not be found here.

3] He then repeats what we have said to him, but he tries to turn it around. They say imitation is a form of flattery

4] then he denies the truths of the doctrines of grace, but again this does not help him come to truth.

You are funny ZA. You actually believe that you have the ability to make reasoned arguments.

IF you are so sure that your man-made religion is not based on pagan philosophy then do the hard work and prove it.

We know from history that augustine brought pagan teachings into the church so you will have a hard time disproving it but why don't you give it the old collage try. Might do you some good to learn some history instead of drinking the calvinist kool-aid.

 

[Zaatar71]

Oh I forgot I do not have my Calvi dictionary on hand.

See there is just another of your many failures ZA. You keep reading your religion into the bible rather than get your theology from the bible.

You are under the delusion that calvinism is the standard by which the word of God should be understood. Oh you silly man.

I repeat the same truths in the hope that you will realize the failure of your man-made religion and turn to the real God of the bible.

You repeat yourself because you have no scripture to go to. only you believe this.

 

[atpollard]

Then whatever church you were attending must have had quite a bit of calvinist religion in there teaching.

No, they acknowledged the fall of man (which I later learned even Classic Arminians do) but adopted the Wesleyan “prevenient grace” solution for how God draws all men from helplessness to “free will” to choose or reject His offer.

My issue was that it contradicted my personal salvation experience … I was an active arsonist, drug smuggler and nihilist when God spoke to me “road to Damascus” style and made an offer that I could not refuse. So a “prevenient grace” to grant me a free will choice to accept or reject some “good news” did not fit the facts of my personal salvation. Thus my search of scripture and preaching to reconcile what I was being told, what I read, and what I remembered first hand.

It was my salvation that was very “Doctrine of Grace” oriented and it is SCRIPTURE that reveals 4 biblical truths that point more to a sovereign God than a sovereign man:

1. People are no darn good.
2. Whatever the reason God saves us, it ain’t cause we deserve it.
3. God does not try, God just does.
4. God finishes what God starts.

Hard Determinism shoves that pendulum too far and places you in a ditch … but if the choice is between “God chose me” and “I chose God” as the reason for my salvation, my empirical experiences land hard on the side of “God chose me.”

 

[Zaatar71]

No, they acknowledged the fall of man (which I later learned even Classic Arminians do) but adopted the Wesleyan “prevenient grace” solution for how God draws all men from helplessness to “free will” to choose or reject His offer.

My issue was that it contradicted my personal salvation experience … I was an active arsonist, drug smuggler and nihilist when God spoke to me “road to Damascus” style and made an offer that I could not refuse. So a “prevenient grace” to grant me a free will choice to accept or reject some “good news” did not fit the facts of my personal salvation. Thus my search of scripture and preaching to reconcile what I was being told, what I read, and what I remembered first hand.

It was my “salvation” that was very “Doctrine of Grace” oriented and it is SCRIPTURE that reveals 4 biblical truths that point more to a sovereign God than a sovereign man:

1. People are no darn good.
2. Whatever the reason God saves us, it ain’t cause we deserve it.
3. God does not try, God just does.
4. God finishes what God starts.

Hard Determinism shoves that pendulum too far and places you in a ditch … but if the choice is between “God chose me” and “I chose God” as the reason for my salvation, my empirical experiences land hard on the side of “God chose me.”

Well said Pollard! This might help someone consider why they have missed it.

 

[Zaatar71]

To me, these are the main reasons that the Bible is misunderstood by so many who profess to be Christians...
They simply do not have the Spirit of God in them to show them the truths that are found in every word of Scripture.

Yes..I think this is true quite often, thanks for your solid observation.

 

[JonC]

I do not see Calvinists anywhere who agree with your assertions. These seem to be your own unique, views. You of course are welcome to your view. Thanks for your input!

Those who would are like me, no longer Calvinists.

That said, history records Calvin's secular studies (his commentaries on philosophy prior to conversion are avaliable, as are biographies of his life).

Calvin reformed Aquinas' theory by shifting it to divine justice. From there the "Five points" will ultimately be built (not by Calvin but primarily by Beza).

It is not my view but a matter of history (regardless to the validity of Calvinism itself). We know how the philosophy developed. That in itself does not make Calvinism wrong, although it is unbiblical in the sence it is not technically in God's Word.


The problem many have is they ignore how their theologies developed. These developed over time, sometimes revising past theories (like Calvin's reworking of Aquinas) and sometimes answering new questions that arose (like the scope of the atonement, which was post-Calvin).

Theology sometimes makes well meaning people stupid and prone to adopting a mythology over history.

 

[Silverhair]

You repeat yourself because you have no scripture to go to. only you believe this.

Actually the majority of Christians believe this ZA.

 

[Silverhair]

No, they acknowledged the fall of man (which I later learned even Classic Arminians do) but adopted the Wesleyan “prevenient grace” solution for how God draws all men from helplessness to “free will” to choose or reject His offer.

My issue was that it contradicted my personal salvation experience … I was an active arsonist, drug smuggler and nihilist when God spoke to me “road to Damascus” style and made an offer that I could not refuse. So a “prevenient grace” to grant me a free will choice to accept or reject some “good news” did not fit the facts of my personal salvation. Thus my search of scripture and preaching to reconcile what I was being told, what I read, and what I remembered first hand.

It was my salvation that was very “Doctrine of Grace” oriented and it is SCRIPTURE that reveals 4 biblical truths that point more to a sovereign God than a sovereign man:

1. People are no darn good.
2. Whatever the reason God saves us, it ain’t cause we deserve it.
3. God does not try, God just does.
4. God finishes what God starts.

Hard Determinism shoves that pendulum too far and places you in a ditch … but if the choice is between “God chose me” and “I chose God” as the reason for my salvation, my empirical experiences land hard on the side of “God chose me.”

Glad you feel that way but what we see as the norm in scripture is that men respond to the gospel message and turn to God in faith.

That is not saving themselves but rather trusting in the one that can save them.

1] Man is a sinner but not so bad that they can't respond to the drawing of God.

2] No man deserves to be saved but God desires to save all people if they will trust in His risen son.

3] Of course God can save and He will save those that come to Him in faith

4] With out a doubt God will bring to glory all those that trust in Him.

I agree that calvinist determinism shoves the pendulum too far. They end up denying what God has said in His word.

You say God chose you but what do you say to the untold millions that God desires to save and are not. Do they have the power to over rule God? Or was God just being disingenuous and He really does not want all to come to Him in faith.

This is the point where calvinism hits the wall, either man has an actual free will or God determines all things. I know they try to avoid the divine determinism but then they turn around and say God ordains all things, rather inconsistent of them.

To say they have the free will to reject God but not to respond with faith in God is saying they do not have a free will. Being depraved/sinful does not remove the ability to think unless you think that the Holy Spirit convicting all men of their sin was just a fun exercise of God and Him not expecting man to to change. But if that were so then why do it in the first place? But being convicted of sin requires that they acknowledge they sin and have the ability to change.

The reality is that even though you say you had a Damascus road experience you still had to make a choice. Either that or God forced you to believe and then you have to question whether you actually believe or if you just think you do.

 

[Silverhair]

Silverhair does not find truth once again because he can only repeat this pagan/ philosophy denial of truth. He almost vindicates all 15 reasons why truth is not found by some.

Still no response from you rebutting that the basis of calvinism is pagan philosophy.

You can deny the truth but that does not change the truth ZA.

Since you are so sure it is not true then where is your proof that what I said is wrong?

 

[JonC]

Actually the majority of Christians believe this ZA.

Good observation.

Sometimes people confuse loud with many, but Calvininism is a minority philosophy within Christianity, and a relatively new one at that.

One bright note is that there are some within Calvinism trying to move towards a more biblical position. This will not, of course, work because it is trying to reform the Reformed rather than deriving doctrine from Scripture (it is the same mistake Calvin made trying to reform Catholic doctrine). But perhaps it will end up at a more biblical place.

What is being questioned within Calvinism by younger generations is not the five points but the Calvinistic philosophy behind atonement. If this moves towards more biblical ground then the rest changes as well because this philosophy is the soil upon which Calvinism sprung.

 

[JonC]

To me, these are the main reasons that the Bible is misunderstood by so many who profess to be Christians...
They simply do not have the Spirit of God in them to show them the truths that are found in every word of Scripture.

I agree. There is too much theory and too much philosophy taking the place of "what is written" in Scripture.

Our doctrine should be founded on God's Word and not Augustine, Aquinas, or Calvin.

I believe what you observe is a lack of trust in God. People read Scripture and trust in what men tell them is taught by the Bible, or their understanding of what passages mean to them, rather than the words God gave us.


That said, I believe even Calvinists can be Christian and live in the Spirit.

 

[Silverhair]

Good observation.

Sometimes people confuse loud with many, but Calvininism is a minority philosophy within Christianity, and a relatively new one at that.

One bright note is that there are some within Calvinism trying to move towards a more biblical position. This will not, of course, work because it is trying to reform the Reformed rather than deriving doctrine from Scripture (it is the same mistake Calvin made trying to reform Catholic doctrine). But perhaps it will end up at a more biblical place.

What is being questioned within Calvinism by younger generations is not the five points but the Calvinistic philosophy behind atonement. If this moves towards more biblical ground then the rest changes as well because this philosophy is the soil upon which Calvinism sprung.

We have seen in history the ebb and flow between the hard of determinism and the soft of liberalism I only hope that we can come to a biblical grounding. Only time will tell.

Some approach these discussion as a contest that has to be won. That is not how I approach it and I hope that is not how they think I do.

I just want people to know God as He can be discovered in the pages of scripture.

 

[JonC]

We have seen in history the ebb and flow between the hard of determinism and the soft of liberalism I only hope that we can come to a biblical grounding. Only time will tell.

Some approach these discussion as a contest that has to be won. That is not how I approach it and I hope that is not how they think I do.

I just want people to know God as He can be discovered in the pages of scripture.

I agree.

I have always found theological development interesting. Sometimes I believe it is for the good (like "persons" and "nature" in the fuller doctrine of the Trinity) and other times I think it for the worse (like with Calvinism and Arminianism). But either way it is interesting.

It isn't, as you point out, about winning arguments but about understanding where, how, and when our theologies developed. Calvinism did not develop in a vacuum but instead as a reaction from within a Roman Catholic tradition to precieved errors in that doctrine.

Likewise, the Five Points of Calvinism (the "Doctrines of Grace) developed as acreaction to the Five Articles of the Remonstrance (which was itself of a Calvinistic trajectory).

My desire here is for Christians to know God as He has revealed Himseld to us in His Word. But I am under no delusions that most will exchange traditions and theories for God's Word. Scripture is very straight forward about our redemption but to many it is foolishness because it does not fit into our philosophies or meet our expectations. The 1st century Jews had the same problem.

If only people could set aside these theories and read Scripture for what is written, with new and untarnished hearts.

 

[Ben1445]

Select a number, then support or oppose it biblically; If you think of other such reasons, feel free to offer your own reasons and explanation

1] They have never studied it for themselves

2] They have been mislead by a false teacher, who never understood the issues for themselves

3] They go on anti- Calvinist websites, and drink in the error ,unchecked by someone who understands the position

4] True spiritual understanding comes by The Spirit of God. They deny this is needful

5] Christians who do believe these truths, have not studied it well enough to communicate it to those who oppose these truths

6] Some struggle with the word of God emotionally, so this hinders them from engaging their mind to prayer and study

7 ] Some lack at some level the mental faculties to connect the Spiritual dots of theology.

8] When offered truth by scripture, or confessions of faith, they turn and make excuses, it is man made, it is philosophy, etc.

9] Sadly some who profess to be Christians, are still men of flesh, natural and unsaved, so truth will not be found in them

10} Others will repeat foolish myths that they have heard or read, without biblical support

Add this one to the end of your list if you can have an honest even discussion.

They are presented with errors and are rejected on the basis of the error contained in them.
Biblical reasoning stands in your inability to find a use of the words ordain and elect in any form (in Scripture, not all your confessions of faith) that describe sinners being chosen to be saved rather than sinners who are saved being chosen to do or be something after they are saved.

 

[Ben1445]

He should have stayed off those Calvinist websites. Terrible is the error of the internet that even the framers of the laws and governments of the United States were not able to grasp the truths that Zaatar holds to be self evident. (Satire)

No. I didn’t get this image from the internet. It is a quote that was sent to me. I don’t think Jefferson posted this on his anti-cal website. But according to Zaatar, it should be rejected not on the merit of what it says, just because you must blindly follow Calvinism (you don’t really have a choice). It must not be considered because it is anti-cal.

 

[atpollard]

Glad you feel that way but what we see as the norm in scripture is that men respond to the gospel message and turn to God in faith.

Like Lydia, whose heart God opened to receive the words about to be preached? [Acts 16:14] ... or more like "as many as were appointed to eternal life believed"? [Acts 13:48]

Because ultimately, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." So then [it is] not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. - Romans 9:15-16 ... THAT is the thread that runs through scripture from Genesis to Revelation. The Gospel is just the means ... God is the CAUSE.

 

[atpollard]

He should have stayed off those Calvinist websites. Terrible is the error of the internet that even the framers of the laws and governments of the United States were not able to grasp the truths that Zaatar holds to be self evident. (Satire)

No. I didn’t get this image from the internet. It is a quote that was sent to me. I don’t think Jefferson posted this on his anti-cal website. But according to Zaatar, it should be rejected not on the merit of what it says, just because you must blindly follow Calvinism (you don’t really have a choice). It must not be considered because it is anti-cal.

Umm ... Thomas Jefferson was a deist that denied all miracles (including the Virgin Birth and Resurrection). Jefferson even created his own bible excising all that miracle nonsense from it. So quite a "champion" you have selected for your cause.

Yes, I can see the similarities between the Jefferson "gospel" and the Free Will reigns supreme "gospel".