• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Truth or Calvinism - That should do it.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Amy.G

New Member
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not!


Did Israel have choice to accept their Messiah?

Did they resist the Holy Spirit?
 

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
Did Israel have choice to accept their Messiah?
Of Course. They rejected him willfully. They weren't forced to.

Did they resist the Holy Spirit?
Of course.

Neither of these are contrary to Calvinism, so long as we are on teh same page in terms of definitions. First, all Calvinists believe that man can reject the Spirit. The Bible plainsly says that they can. But Calvinism teaches there is an effectual call in passages like 1 Cor 1 that is usually called "Irresistable Grace." It is a bad term, and most reject that terminology I think. If you look at 1 Cor 1, you will see that the "called" are the ones who accept Christ, and they are contrasted with the others who do not accept them. The Bible teaches two calls -- a general call to everyone and a specific or effectual call to the elect. The primitives and hyperCalvinists err by denying the first, and the Arminianistic (such as yourself) err by denying the second. The Bible teaches both and therefore both must be held.

Second, all men have free will. They can do whatever they want. Because of sin, their will is corrupted and is bound by sin so that all they want to do is sin, and they do it freely. Free will is always defined according to nature. So man is free just like God is. But neither are free to do anything. There are things God cannot do because he is limited by his nature.

Amy, you like so many others seem to have a misconception about Calvinism combined with an inadequate understanding of the Bible that leads you to conclusions that really aren't supportable. I haven't seen everything you have said in this thread, but over the years I have seen enough to know that there are some holes big enough to drive a truck through in your theology and understanding.
 

Amy.G

New Member
I haven't seen everything you have said in this thread, but over the years I have seen enough to know that there are some holes big enough to drive a truck through in your theology and understanding.
Wow. I didn't know my theology was that bad. I could almost get my feelings hurt.


The Bible teaches two calls -- a general call to everyone and a specific or effectual call to the elect.
So which kind of call did Jesus give to Israel?
 

Tom Butler

New Member
Amy G. said:
The hardening was a result of their rejection of Jesus as Messiah.

This is a dangerous view for non-Cals, because it means that God has unilaterally declared that those whom he hardens no longer will have a chance to be saved. He has placed them in a state where belief in Jesus is no longer possible. He has condemned them to Hell by his hardening. He has removed their free will and made it impossible for them to choose Christ as Savior.

Isn't this what non-Cals accuse Cals of believing? And condemn them for it?
 

Amy.G

New Member
This is a dangerous view for non-Cals, because it means that God has unilaterally declared that those whom he hardens no longer will have a chance to be saved. He has placed them in a state where belief in Jesus is no longer possible. He has condemned them to Hell by his hardening. He has removed their free will and made it impossible for them to choose Christ as Savior.

Isn't this what non-Cals accuse Cals of believing? And condemn them for it?

First of all, it's not my place to condemn anybody.


Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


The hardening of one's heart is a judicial action on God's part because they rejected the light He revealed.




Can you answer my question? Which call did Jesus give Israel? General or effectual?
 

Darrenss1

New Member
You completely avoided my questions.
So I will repeat them:

Are you saying that the triune God of scripture is unable to save someone who does not want to be?
Is He unable to save the entire world if that was His plan?
Is he not really omnipotent after all?

BTW - just for your interest I did answer your questions in the statement -

"Seems to me God's omnipotence functions as it does when man has been given the responsibility to respond to God, especially to the call of the gospel. I see no contradiction at all."

And my question thanks -
"Now since God planned NOT to save everyone but only some WHY?? did God not plan to save ALL?"

Darren
 

Martin

Active Member
The hardening was a result of their rejection of Jesus as Messiah.

==Right and their rejection of the Lord Jesus was part of God's plan (Acts 4:27-28, Rom 9:11-32).

They say it all the time. They say if God desires something then He will do it or else He is not sovereign.

==I think you are misunderstanding something. Calvinists recognize that God desires men to be saved and that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Men like RC Sproul and John MacArthur (both Calvinists) agree that God does not desire men to perish. I just verified that by examining their comments on 1Tim. 2:4 in their study Bibles.

No. Calvinists say that God only desires that the "elect" be saved. That is why He passes over the others.

==That is not what Calvinism says. Calvinism teaches, as do some non-calvinists, that God saves the elect and passes over the non-elect. That is the doctrine of Preterition. Most mainstream Calvinists also agree that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ez 18:32, etc). God would love to see everyone saved. However it is not His Sovereign will to save everyone. God could save everyone if He wanted to, but it is not His will to do so.


If Israel wasn't His sheep, then what was the point of Him coming to them?

==Acts 13:44-48, 28:28, Matt 22:1-14, Rom 11:25-32.
 

Martin

Active Member
Let's skip all the other and answer this, because it answers all the other.

==I think we are skipping here because you don't want to deal with the various points being raised. It is much easier to re-define the discussion than to follow through on what has already been said. Anyway, I'll go along with this...


1. Jesus told Israel, "I would, you wouldn't", and that was "BECAUSE" they had closed their eyes/ears/hearts to his messiage.

If "Sovereign will/predestination" had "decreed" that God wasn't going to give them to Jesus to "MAKE" believers out of them,

"WHY" would Jesus make an offer against the "predestine will of God", and then "ACCUSE Israel" of being at "FAULT" for closing their eyes/ears/hearts to his message???

==In the Scriptures, people are condemned for their unbelief (Jn 3:18-19). Never does the Bible excuse unbelief on the basis that a person was not elect. After all, the door to salvation is open for all to walk through. That man refuses to walk through that door is a sign of the wickedness of his heart. Therefore unless (until) God moves in a person's heart, they will remain in wickedness and unbelief (Rom 3:9-12).


Jesus was only sent to Israel, and "his own received him not", Your doctrine is "BLAMING GOD" for not given them what they "NEEDED" to be saved,

==No, we are not blaming God. People are responsible for their own actions. That we are sinful creatures who naturally choose sin and unbelief is not God's fault. God is under no obligation to save anyone. That He saves any is an amazing truth.

Btw, God can do what He wants. He does not answer to us. Psalm 135:6, Isaiah 46:6, Daniel 4:35.


but Jesus died for all sins that the whole world "might be" saved,

==I agree.

So your doctrine also "ACCUSES GOD" of witholding what is "NEEDED" to be saved from the "whole world".

==Is it possible for you to discuss these issues without slandering those with whom you disagree? This is one reason I usually avoid these discussions. They end up needlessly dividing Christians. Both George Whitefield and John Wesley are in heaven today. They were both great men of God, who loved their Savior dearly. Yet they held very different understandings of election. Nobody goes to heaven or hell because they got election right. There is nothing wrong with discussing these truths but the discussion does become fruitless when it becomes a reason for division and slander.

Predestination "denies" that it is "POSSIBLE" for the whole world to be saved, fulfiling God's "DESIRE" that "NONE PERISH",

==Predestination and election are two separate doctrines. I think you are talking about election. Predestination has to do with the fate of the saved (Rom 8:29-30). No place in Scripture does it say that just because God desires someone to be saved He will save them. In order to be saved a person must come to Christ in faith. As I have said, and more importantly as is stated clearly in the Word of God, nobody can come to faith in Christ unless they are given to the Son by the Father and drawn by the Father (Jn 6:37,44).

But everyone won't have "FAITH", and without man "FIRST" having Faith, God won't save, Grace/salvation/regeneration only comes "AFTER" faith, never before.

==I agree that salvation only comes after faith. The problem I have with your statement is when you place man at the front of the line. That is not consistant with Scriptures like John 6:37.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Darrenss1

New Member
God would love to see everyone saved. However it is not His Sovereign will to save everyone. God could save everyone if He wanted to, but it is not His will to do so.

That is completely counterintuitive. God would love to save everyone but unfortuntely God did not will it.

So the difference between saved and not saved is unconditional election and nothing to do with the responsibility of man.

Darren
 

Me4Him

New Member
Neither of these are contrary to Calvinism, so long as we are on teh same page in terms of definitions. First, all Calvinists believe that man can reject the Spirit. The Bible plainsly says that they can.

I agree that definitions are the problems.


But Calvinism teaches there is an effectual call in passages like 1 Cor 1 that is usually called "Irresistable Grace." It is a bad term, and most reject that terminology I think. If you look at 1 Cor 1, you will see that the "called" are the ones who accept Christ, and they are contrasted with the others who do not accept them.

Some thing occur outside the "normal" procedures that the "Scriptures might be fulfilled",

The calling of Moses, David, Paul, are just a few of those example.

The Bible teaches two calls -- a general call to everyone and a specific or effectual call to the elect. The primitives and hyperCalvinists err by denying the first, and the Arminianistic (such as yourself) err by denying the second. The Bible teaches both and therefore both must be held.

The only way effectual calling can be different than an "Ineffectual calling", is for the "Spirit" to be absent in the ineffectual calling,

Of course the spirit is "God's voice", but if there's no spirit in the calling, then it's not possible for them to "Reject" God's calling that never came.

Keep in mind that Jesus told Israel to believe his works, if not his words, and that was meant to be an "Effectual calling".

Mt 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.


Second, all men have free will. They can do whatever they want. Because of sin, their will is corrupted and is bound by sin so that all they want to do is sin, and they do it freely. Free will is always defined according to nature. So man is free just like God is. But neither are free to do anything. There are things God cannot do because he is limited by his nature.

Once you commit the first sin, the rest really doesn't matter, but the nature on man, that is God's laws written on his heart, saved or lost, otherwise known as our "Conscience", tell us when we've committed a "wrong", even if we don't recognize it as a sin until we learn the law.

Hearing the gospel, it's condemnation of us, and what we must do to be saved, leaves us with the "CHOICE" of believing/confessing we're sinners/accepting Jesus or rejecting both Gospel/Jesus.

Ac 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

As you said, man are free like God, we're made in his Image, and that make us "GODS" as well, just not the "Supreme God".

Ge 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Ps 97:7 Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods.

Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Man can't save himself, God can, but won't unless man is willing to enter into a ""blood Covenant" with God, the blood of Jesus and the blood of man's "body of sin". (old man crucified)

Heb 9:22 and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Mt 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, (covenant) which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

If we're not willing to crucify the old man, we can't have covenant with Jesus, the old man's death is a "testament" to our covenant with Jesus.

Mr 10:38 But Jesus said unto them, can ye drink of the cup that I drink of?

Mt 26:39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Sacrificing this body of sin is a sacrifice only we can decide to make,

every person is as free to say not as thou will, but as I wilt,

As Jesus was to say, not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Le 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey;

whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
God would love to save everyone but unfortuntely God did not will it.
Isn't this what you believe?

So the difference between saved and not saved is unconditional election and nothing to do with the responsibility of man.
What makes you think that unconditional election and man's responsibility don't coexist?
 

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
Wow. I didn't know my theology was that bad. I could almost get my feelings hurt.
Your theology has some big holes in that I think you need to give more through to.

So which kind of call did Jesus give to Israel?
This is a bit misleading in that his dealings with national Israel are distinct to some degree from his dealings with individual Israelites. With the latter, as with all men, all receive the general call and some the effectual call.
 

Darrenss1

New Member
==Predestination and election are two separate doctrines. I think you are talking about election. Predestination has to do with the fate of the saved (Rom 8:29-30). No place in Scripture does it say that just because God desires someone to be saved He will save them. In order to be saved a person must come to Christ in faith. As I have said, and more importantly as is stated clearly in the Word of God, nobody can come to faith in Christ unless they are given to the Son by the Father and drawn by the Father (Jn 6:37,44).

==I agree that salvation only comes after faith. The problem I have with your statement is when you place man at the front of the line. That is not consistant with Scriptures like John 6:37.

John 6:37 - 47 is the favorite for calvinism especially v37 -
"All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out."

What is made clear about this verse according to calvinism is their "interpretation" not the text itself. It simply means those whom believe by being drawn by the Father are given over to the Son (Avocate in heaven) and they will be raised up on the last day (eternal security).

If v37 according to calvinism means unconditional election than v44 can be interpreted the same way -
"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

So the calvinist then assumes v37 + v44 that ALL whom are drawn are raised up - unconditrional election + irresistible grace.

Darren
 

Amy.G

New Member
Your theology has some big holes in that I think you need to give more through to.

This is a bit misleading in that his dealings with national Israel are distinct to some degree from his dealings with individual Israelites. With the latter, as with all men, all receive the general call and some the effectual call.

So you are saying that Jesus didn't go to the nation of Israel, only individuals?
 

Darrenss1

New Member
Isn't this what you believe?

In a word no. How can God love someone if He had no intention of saving them? God cannot say He would love or desire to save Rob, Jack, Mary, Sarah..etc if He had no intentions to save them at any time.

What makes you think that unconditional election and man's responsibility don't coexist?

The responsibility I refer to infers freedom of choice, to accept or reject. Irrestible grace nullifies that I'm sure.

Darren
 

Martin

Active Member
That is completely counterintuitive. God would love to save everyone but unfortuntely God did not will it.

==Of course, denying Calvinism does not solve this problem (mystery). If God is all mighty, and all loving, then why not save everyone? In other words, Calvinism is not alone in this mystery.
 

Martin

Active Member
What is made clear about this verse according to calvinism is their "interpretation" not the text itself. It simply means those whom believe by being drawn by the Father are given over to the Son (Avocate in heaven) and they will be raised up on the last day (eternal security).

==What? "those whom believe by being drawn by the Father"? What does that mean? Nobody can come to Jesus who is not drawn by the Father (vs44). Secondly you said, "are given over to the Son and they will be raised up on the last day". The passage says "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me" (vs37). That is, everyone the Father gives to the Son will come to the Son. The Father gives, they come (Jn 17:1-3). The order there is very important. Your right, Calvinism makes a lot out of this verse. That is because these verses prove three out of the five points of Calvinism (UIP).

If v37 according to calvinism means unconditional election than v44 can be interpreted the same way -
"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

So the calvinist then assumes v37 + v44 that ALL whom are drawn are raised up - unconditrional election + irresistible grace.

==We don't assume it, it is what the texts say.

"All the Father gives Me will come to Me...This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day"

All the Father gives to Jesus will come to Jesus and be raised up on the last day. All given will come and all will be raised. All who the Father gives to the Son will be raised up on the last day.

"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day"

Those the Father draws to Jesus, Jesus will raise up on the last day. The passage leaves no room for someone to be drawn by the Father yet not raised up.
 

Darrenss1

New Member
==Of course, denying Calvinism does not solve this problem (mystery). If God is all mighty, and all loving, then why not save everyone? In other words, Calvinism is not alone in this mystery.

Calvinism is ALONE in this mystery because calvinism simply projects their interpretation onto non calvinists in their "man centred", "synergism"....etc objections. A free gift offered in love requires the recipient to receive it, bottom line.

Darren
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top