Another Calvinistic Error

[preachinjesus]

My interaction with Calvinists have shown me that they believe that Christ's atoning blood is only effective for the elect. I say that Jesus Christ died for every person who has or who will ever live. The forgiveness if there, it only has to be accepted.

This is pretty close to the reformed position. In fact it would be considered (in theological terms) a lighter version. It is also my position.

The difference would be that most committed calvinists would insist the elect are a predestined, preordained group of individuals that are determined by God to be saved.

I would suggest that predestined has more to do with foreknowledge than determination. That God is atemporally located outside of time allows Him to know all events within time in a single instance. (The point is more refined than this but it gets the point across.)

Ironically your attack against Calvinism is against the nature of election than the extent of the atonement of Christ. If you wish to point out "Calvinistic Error" it would be a worthwhile engagement to go at from this angle. Otherwise you and the Calvinist virtually agree on the extent of the atonement.

 

[webdog]

Do you believe that the only reason a person goes to hell is because they reject the gospel of Jesus Christ?

If that is what you mean, wouldn't it be better never to witness to anyone? Just let them die in ignorance so they never get an opportunity to reject Jesus Christ.

peace to youraying:

They can't claim ignorance, they already rejected Him (Rom. 1). All men have been given the truth, and have been placed in the exact location and place in time to seek Him (Acts. 17:26)

 

[Robert Snow]

The difference would be that most committed calvinists would insist the elect are a predestined, preordained group of individuals that are determined by God to be saved.

This is my biggest disageement with Calvinism on this point.

 

[canadyjd]

They can't claim ignorance, they already rejected Him (Rom. 1). All men have been given the truth, and have been placed in the exact location and place in time to seek Him (Acts. 17:26)

All men have been given a general revelation of God found in creation. That renders them without excuse.

Not all men have been given the specific revelation found in the gospel of Jesus Christ, by which men must be saved that are going to be saved.

peace to youraying:

 

[Amy.G]

Do you believe that the only reason a person goes to hell is because they reject the gospel of Jesus Christ?

If that is what you mean, wouldn't it be better never to witness to anyone? Just let them die in ignorance so they never get an opportunity to reject Jesus Christ.

peace to youraying:

Sorry brother. I missed your post earlier.

Yes, I do believe this because this is what Jesus said.

The scripture says that Christ was the propitiation for all men. (1 John 2:2) Therefore, atonement has been made for all men, but not all men believe. Those who do not believe are condemned. (John 3:18)

 

[Allan]

Sorry brother. I missed your post earlier.

Yes, I do believe this because this is what Jesus said.

The scripture says that Christ was the propitiation for all men. (1 John 2:2) Therefore, atonement has been made for all men, but not all men believe. Those who do not believe are condemned. (John 3:18)

Don't forget the verse that states the propitiation is applied only through faith in His blood. (Rom 3:25)

I will go back to my little hole in the wall now

 

[Allan]

All men have been given a general revelation of God found in creation. That renders them without excuse.

Not all men have been given the specific revelation found in the gospel of Jesus Christ, by which men must be saved that are going to be saved.

peace to youraying:

To deny the those basic 'general' truths is to deny the existance of God as well as sin, righteousness and the judgement to come. These are stated as the 'general' truths revealed to all men. What we also need to remember is that all of these truths are spiritual and therefore can not be known by man without the Holy Spirit revealing it to them, for that is the work of the Holy Spirit. - "Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment "

These things can not be known nor understood without the revelation of them to men by the holy Spirit. So to reject these truths is to reject the very essense of the salvation of God of which these truths are eternally bound up together in the gospel. Therefore men are without excuse and are also condemned for rejecting the very core elements of the salvation message. And yet for those who do accept them, the gospel has always been sent.

 

[Skandelon]

I've never really understood why so much effort is spent on the subject of limited atonement with-in this debate, after all unless one holds to Universalism we all agree that the atonement is "limited." It's either limited to those who freely believe of their own choosing or limited to those God has determined beforehand to save, right?

I think both Calvinists and Arminians believe that the atoning work of Christ is sufficient for all and only efficient for those who believe.

 

[zrs6v4]

People go to hell for one reason only.

Joh*3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I dont think this verse is saying that people are condemned because they dont accept Jesus as Savior. As I have said, there is some truth to that, but I think the point is that if you are believing then you are no longer condemned by your sin. On the other hand if you are not believing then your sin remains because you dont have a propitiation.

so

you either believe and Christ and he is your wrath and sin bearer, your righteousness... In this case you are free from the Law

or

you do not believe and Christ is not your wrath and sin bearer, your righteousness... In this case your are still bound by the Law

 

[zrs6v4]

I've never really understood why so much effort is spent on the subject of limited atonement with-in this debate, after all unless one holds to Universalism we all agree that the atonement is "limited." It's either limited to those who freely believe of their own choosing or limited to those God has determined beforehand to save, right?

I think both Calvinists and Arminians believe that the atoning work of Christ is sufficient for all and only efficient for those who believe.

I agree with you on this point.

The issue is that there are some on here that believe Christ paid for everyone's sins on the cross, even those who don't choose Him.

This means that people "only" go to hell for one reason- rejecting Christ.

In other words

Hitler, the 20 year old college student, and the banker all go to hell and receive equal punishment on the basis of only rejection because Christ paid for their sin on the cross. They just rejected His gift of salvation

 

[Dr. Bob]

Words have meaning and context. Meaning changes with the context to help us understand.

If I was talking about PC World (magazine for geeks) you would understand the "world" is very limited to a sphere of interest in that case. If I said Octavian said the whole "world" should be taxed, you would know he was not talking about Incas in Peru or even those in China or Japan.

Most of the NT must be read thinking of the JEWISH mindset (all writers were of that persuasion and training). It was always US v world of others, gentiles, nations.

So when I read Pastor John writing to his church that was mostly Jewish converts and rejoicing that the atonement was not just for "us" (Jewish believers) but for the world (gentile believers), he was in no way implying a universal atonement.

Understanding the context helps.

Christ did not die to provide possible atonement for anyone (but assuring no one of salvation). While His blood COULD have saved everyone/everything, no one doubts, this was not its purpose. If He actually atoned (paid the price to the Father; done deal; set in stone) for a sin, it is atoned for!! Period. End of discussion. Who cares if you believe or accept it; it is atoned for.

Hence the universalism heresy (all men will go to heaven) always rears its ugly head in talking about the alternative the limiting the atonement.

Jesus died to provide real atonement for all those pre-known (not pre-seen) and loved from before the foundation of the world, those selected by God to receive grace. This is "particular redemption".

 

[zrs6v4]

To deny the those basic 'general' truths is to deny the existance of God as well as sin, righteousness and the judgement to come. These are stated as the 'general' truths revealed to all men. What we also need to remember is that all of these truths are spiritual and therefore can not be known by man without the Holy Spirit revealing it to them, for that is the work of the Holy Spirit. - "Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment "

These things can not be known nor understood without the revelation of them to men by the holy Spirit. So to reject these truths is to reject the very essense of the salvation of God of which these truths are eternally bound up together in the gospel. Therefore men are without excuse and are also condemned for rejecting the very core elements of the salvation message. And yet for those who do accept them, the gospel has always been sent.

I dont think these truths that make everyone guilty (Romans 1-3) are the same kind of truths that lead them to Christ (please dont misunderstand me). People know they are sinners because of conscience and the Law (whether this is a type of work of the Spirit Im not sure). The Spirit teaches the heart or, in other words, makes that connection of their sin in light of the Gospel in their inner being. So what I mean is that while these general revelation truths play a role in conviction, they aren't convicting (unto salvation, just guilt and condemnation) until the Spirit works through the Gospel. Therefore, I would say that these truths condemn the world and some die in this lost state without hearing the Gospel. This breaks my heart. So in order for the hope to be in effect one must know Christ crucified, not merely internal guilt that people cope with by sinning more.

You are right by saying that men are condemned by these general revelations and furthermore by rejecting Christ. This also means that people who have never had a chance to hear the gospel are still condemned by general revelation. I would disagree with you furthermore if what you are saying (which I dont think you are) is that the Holy Spirit preaches the gospel to people in the same way people generally sense God and guilt (without physically hearing also). I think God is able to do anything including personally revealing Himself to everyone with no help, but I think He has specifically chosen to bring people to saving knowledge through evangelism. He has called us to reach out to these people by telling them the truth and He works through that. With that said, I think there were people in Asia who died the very next day after the atoning work was finished and yet never heard the Gospel. The same with today. This freaks me out, because I didnt deserve to hear the gospel or can't say anything if I never got a chance! This should bring urgency to go out and bless people who, without you, are lost... And of course it is by God's grace that we can do so.

I dont think it is biblical to assume God reaches everyone that has not heard the Gospel to give them a chance. I am not saying that it isnt a warm thought or that God doesn't do this but it isn't in Scripture. What is in Scripture is that people are dying daily going to hell without excuse or a Savior and that we need to go everyday and preach to them so they may believe and be saved by God's grace. I am not saying that we can narrow God down as to how He brings the Word to the chosen hearer or whatever the case is. God is clearly creative in how He does these things.

 

[Hawkins]

Limited Atonement, according to the Calvinist says that Christ only died for the elect. Yet, I John 2:2 disproves this belief.

1Jn 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

I think it says that the atonement is enough to save everyone, if everyone chooses to believe in Jesus Christ. No matter how many men in human history are going to choose to believe in Jesus Christ they will be saved, since the atonement is more than enough to do so, although the reality is that not everyone is going to choose to believe in Him.

 

[Robert Snow]

Jesus died to provide real atonement for all those pre-known (not pre-seen) and loved from before the foundation of the world, those selected by God to receive grace. This is "particular redemption".

I disagree with all due respect. What decides who is atoned for isn't some arbitrary choice by God, it is all those who choose to believe in Jesus Christ after the Gospel is preached.

BTW, since Calvinist don't know on what basis God decides who to accept, if you believe Calvinism, how do you know it isn't based on pre-knowledge on God's part?

 

[Allan]

I dont think these truths that make everyone guilty (Romans 1-3) are the same kind of truths that lead them to Christ (please dont misunderstand me).

If it makes them guilty unto condemnation for not believing then what is the logical outcome resulting in believing them?
Is it not leading to salvation, or better God bringing forth the fulness of the truth so that they might be saved?

People know they are sinners because of conscience and the Law (whether this is a type of work of the Spirit Im not sure).

Of course it is. Nature, the Law and the conscience are the 'means' throught which the Spirit of God works. Look at what Rom 1:18-32 speak of them 'knowing' by being taught of God, and rejecting. Now the scriptures state they do in fact 'know' or better 'understand' and that fact is because it was revealed 'to them' by God. But if you examine what was revealed you will notice it is God, sin, (His) righteousness, and the judgment to come. Now who does scripture state does this 'exact' thing?
"Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment "

The Spirit teaches the heart or, in other words, makes that connection of their sin in light of the Gospel in their inner being. So what I mean is that while these general revelation truths play a role in conviction, they aren't convicting (unto salvation, just guilt and condemnation) until the Spirit works through the Gospel.

To me this is an illogical argument or makes no sense. Scripture states that it is God who is teaching them, not them coming to understand these things on their own. However if scripture is true and we add your above view to it, then God, though God is teaching them, doesn't do a good enough job in teaching/revealing for them to 'really' understand. A couple of problems here. 1. This place God in an active role in the reprobation of man. We would have God purposely withholding the 'full' truth from them so they do not repent and come to the knowledge of truth.
Here in lies problem 2.This can not be because scripture specifically states that God desires all men to repent 'and come to the knowledge of truth'. The only way a person can know there is a God, what sin is, righteousness is, or the judgment to come, is to be taught/revealed this by the Holy Spirit as says scripture since these are spiritual matters. But Romans 1 (amoung many other passages) speak to the fact that these people 'knowing the truth' TRADED it, discarded it, forsook it, for a lie. And is ONLY at this point we find scripture states -after their rejection - God gives them over to their sin.

You are right by saying that men are condemned by these general revelations and furthermore by rejecting Christ. This also means that people who have never had a chance to hear the gospel are still condemned by general revelation.

Yes, but it also does not negate the fact that those who believed those truths that God would bring them the full truth in due time.

I would disagree with you furthermore if what you are saying (which I dont think you are) is that the Holy Spirit preaches the gospel to people in the same way people generally sense God and guilt (without physically hearing also). I think God is able to do anything including personally revealing Himself to everyone with no help, but I think He has specifically chosen to bring people to saving knowledge through evangelism. He has called us to reach out to these people by telling them the truth and He works through that.

Not sure what you are getting at here, but I think I agree with you

With that said, I think there were people in Asia who died the very next day after the atoning work was finished and yet never heard the Gospel. The same with today.

Of course there were and are, but that was because they had already rejected the truth revealed to them by God Himself. Romans 1 and other passages tell us this for it is only after their rejection that we find God turning them over. What needs to be remembered here is that in order for God to turn them over, He must first have been personally dealing with them.

I dont think it is biblical to assume God reaches everyone that has not heard the Gospel to give them a chance.

I do believe it is biblical that God is and has been reaching out to all men everywhere because scripture states it over and over again and this is done by the revealing certain truths through nature and conscience and law.
I do agree however the gospel is given by God through men, to men to whom He chooses to reveal it, yet it came be noted for certain that the gospel has not been sent around the world for the purpose of being heard and understood by one particular person who did not already believe those general truths.

I am not saying that it isnt a warm thought or that God doesn't do this but it isn't in Scripture.

But it IS in scripture. Some of the most commonly used are:
1. God desires all men to repent and come to the knowledge of truth.
2. He our propitiation but not ours only but the propitiation of 'whole' world. (and John clarifies his meaning of 'whole world' just a few verse on by stating the 'whole world' lies in wickedness) - ie.. all unsaved and sinfilled man
3. The Holy Spirit is sent to convict the 'world' of sin, His righteousness, and the judgment to come
4. Jesus stated that He will draw all men unto Himself (how - by the ministry of the Holy Spirit)
5. God so loved the world that ... whoever believed... would have eternal life
6. The Law and the Atonement and to whom it was to be made (all of Isreal - both saved and non alike which is a miniture picture of the scope of true atonement.) Also, no one was excluded from becoming apart of Israel anyone could come, and many did.
7. Those false teachers denying the very one 'who bought them'
and so on.. and so on.. and so on...

What is in Scripture is that people are dying daily going to hell without excuse or a Savior

No see, this isn't biblical. IF that is biblical then their rejection should have absolutely no effect on their eternal state is they have no saviour. However scripture states again and again that they will be condemned because they rejected the truth that could save them and so God gave them over to believe the lie so that they might be damned BECAUSE they did not believe. (2 Thes 2:10-12) How their rejection have ANY sway on their eternal state unless they do in fact have a savior? The very fact their rejection plays a part in the damnation proves emphatically they have a savior but since they would not believe that propitiation which was made is not applied to them (Rom 3:25)

Nice to hear from you again :wavey:

 

[Skandelon]

I agree with you on this point.

The issue is that there are some on here that believe Christ paid for everyone's sins on the cross, even those who don't choose Him.

This means that people "only" go to hell for one reason- rejecting Christ.

In other words

Hitler, the 20 year old college student, and the banker all go to hell and receive equal punishment on the basis of only rejection because Christ paid for their sin on the cross. They just rejected His gift of salvation

Yes, I am aware of that position and I can see how someone might come to that conclusion. Some in that camp argue that the "unpardonable sin" is this rejecting of Christ (the Holy Spirit). And that all sin is atoned for and thus the only sin not covered is the sin of rejecting Christ...otherwise described as "the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit," since the HS is the one who brings us the gospel and is the current guide to knowing Christ.

My point is that it doesn't really seem to be the main point of contention all things considered.

 

[Allan]

Words have meaning and context. Meaning changes with the context to help us understand.

If I was talking about PC World (magazine for geeks) you would understand the "world" is very limited to a sphere of interest in that case. If I said Octavian said the whole "world" should be taxed, you would know he was not talking about Incas in Peru or even those in China or Japan.

Most of the NT must be read thinking of the JEWISH mindset (all writers were of that persuasion and training). It was always US v world of others, gentiles, nations.

Agreed. 'us' = Isreal or the Jewish people.

So when I read Pastor John writing to his church that was mostly Jewish converts and rejoicing that the atonement was not just for "us" (Jewish believers) but for the world (gentile believers), he was in no way implying a universal atonement.

It is rather interesting that you first state we must read most of the NT with the Jewish mindset, and then diverge away from that Jewish mindset to incert the phrase 'Jewish believers' into the mix, instead of maintaining the common view not specifically of Jewish believers but of the Jewish 'people' or the 'Jewish Nation'.

I agreed with the first portion and to grasp the full meaning of John's usage one needs to know specifically how John consistantly uses the phrase 'whole world' which will typically illistrate the cultural mindset.

While John does use the term 'world often and it has 3 basic meanings and of those three 'base' meanings variations of them can be noted. (1) World (as in earth itself), (2) Geographically specific to a place or world system (ie. Roman world), and (3) all sinful wicked men.
*NOTE* World NEVER refers to believers. A word can not have two contradicting meanings (ie. yes can not mean both yes and no. Just as saved does not mean both saved and lost) Believers are not of this world, we are called to be seperate from the world and to come out from amoung the world, ect.. and at the same time be said to 'be the world'.

The OT established the meanings and the NT continued it and does not contradict it. When scripture is speaking of the spiritual state of people the term 'world' always refers to the sinful wicked men. John also used the phrase 'whole world' and while it's meaning regarding the spiritual state of men does not change it's scope does. Just for review here is everytime John uses this particular phrase:

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

1Jo 5:19 [And] we know that we are of God, a\nd the whole world lieth in wickedness.

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, [which] go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

It is of note that John uses the phrase 'whole world' four times, twice in two different books he writes. In each instance we plainly see that John holds this phrase to be used in only one way - whole world = sinful wicked men. The term 'whole world' encompasses not only the gentiles, in which the term 'world' alread speaks to, but 'whole world' includes both the Jews and Gentiles as one group instead of Christ dieing only for those of the Jewish Nation.

Understanding the context helps.

Yep, that is why we must allow context to determine the meanings of words and not our theology.

Christ did not die to provide possible atonement for anyone (but assuring no one of salvation).

This is humorous. Salvation is possible for anyone, and yes it DOES and HAS assured salvation for those who believe, who are the same as those written before the creation of the world. (This for me does not speak to their faith being 'for-seen - I don't agree with that concept)

While His blood COULD have saved everyone/everything, no one doubts, this was not its purpose. If He actually atoned (paid the price to the Father; done deal; set in stone) for a sin, it is atoned for!! Period. End of discussion. Who cares if you believe or accept it; it is atoned for.

Of course it is atoned for however it IS NOT applied to anyone till they believe (Rom 3:25).

Hence the universalism heresy (all men will go to heaven) always rears its ugly head in talking about the alternative the limiting the atonement.

It only comes up with Calvinists who don't understand the position.

Jesus died to provide real atonement for all those pre-known (not pre-seen) and loved from before the foundation of the world, those selected by God to receive grace. This is "particular redemption".

Yes, He die to provide real atonement for all those pre-known, as well as for the whole world. (2 Thes 2:10-12) These are the followers of the anti-christ and yet the scripture states they did not receive (Greek is Aorist, Middle deponent (or active voice - meaning they choose not to receive), indictive mood) the love of the truth that COULD SAVE THEM... that they might be damned who choose not to believe the truth. What truth? Salvation through Christ, and it is for rejection of Him/salvation that God THEN determines to damn them for not believing the truth.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I disagree with all due respect. What decides who is atoned for isn't some arbitrary choice by God, it is all those who choose to believe in Jesus Christ after the Gospel is preached.

BTW, since Calvinist don't know on what basis God decides who to accept, if you believe Calvinism, how do you know it isn't based on pre-knowledge on God's part?

It IS based on God's foreknowing me (NOT foreseeing I would do some good work which the Bible clearly teaches is impossible).

But one of the horrendous teaching of the finneyesque era was that man has some innate ability to seek God, call on God, believe savingly on God. This makes MAN a "god" (lie of the Garden of Eden) with god's abilities.

My Bible still carefully shows the complete and utter inability of man to do one right thing (in the eyes of God; I'm tricked occasionally and might see some good deed in MY eyes). This of course does not imply man is as evil as he might be - there are degrees of evil and unregenerate man will be judged accordingly.

But unless elected/loved/chosen by the Father in eternity past and declared to be a "sheep", a person will never want to be saved. He will continue in his fallen nature merrily on the road to eternal perdition. God doesn't have to "elect" him to hell; he's already chosen that road.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I disagree with all due respect. What decides who is atoned for isn't some arbitrary choice by God, it is all those who choose to believe in Jesus Christ after the Gospel is preached.

BTW, since Calvinist don't know on what basis God decides who to accept, if you believe Calvinism, how do you know it isn't based on pre-knowledge on God's part?

Hey Robert,

First, I don't think there is any convincing you of Calvinist doctrine/theology and won't try. What I would do is try to help you, if you desire, to understand your brothers and sisters in Christ who differ from you on these points of doctrine.

I am curious if you care to answer, why you feel it is needed to refute Calvinism? What is so destructive about in your opinion?

But to address your questions here (I have not the whole thread) God does not make arbitrary choices. His choices are never without purpose. It seems by your statements that you have an understanding of Calvinism that is inconsistent with Calvinism itself.

Perhaps this comes from your understanding of Calvinsim coming from individuals who may themselves not understand it well, or are able to articulate aspects of the doctrine?

And, from my point of view, I would disagree with your statement that Calvinist don't know on what basis God makes His choice. Ephesian 1:1-10 explain the "basis" on which God made His choice and predestination. He did what He did, chose whom He chose, on the basis of His love, good pleasure of His will which He purposed in Himself, to the praise of the glory of His grace.

God's purpose is also seen in verses 10-12

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

God's focus and purpose is Christ Jesus. In Christ Jesus we who believe have obtained an inheritance in Him, and were predestined. Look at verse 11. It does tell us on what basis we were predestined: according the purpose of Him who works all things after the counsel of HIS WILL.

So, it seems clear and plain to me what is the basis of God's choices.

 

[Johnv]

One problem with the hyperarminian position is that it limits God's existence to a linear timeline, thus robbing Him of complete sovereignty over all.