My thoughts on Calvinism

[Tom Butler]

TisMe, your reading list appears to be across a pretty good spectrum of opinion on Calvinism.

I would like to speak to what I believe are a couple of wrong conclusions about Calvinists.

One misconception is that Calvinism produces arrogance. I disagree. If anything, it should produce deep humility and gratitude. I don't know a single Calvinist whom I consider arrogant. In fact, arrogant Calvinist is an oxymoron.

We all believe in salvation by grace through faith. We bring no merit to the table. We have nothing to offer God to merit his grace. The same with election. We bring nothing to the table. If election is based on foreseen faith, it seems to me that we elected ourselves, and God owed us salvation because of something He saw in us.

I understand why some would question a soteriology in which God picks winners and losers. Why would God choose some for salvation, and not choose others? To tell you the truth, I don't know.

And then Romans 9 comes to mind:

13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—

Now reading this passage does not answer my questions about why God chose as he did. But it does explain that God has made those choices and has the right to make them, and that those choices are designed to bring glory to Himself.

I have to remind myself that God is not obligated to treat us all alike. And I definitely am glad that he does not give us what we deserve. We'd all be headed for the hot place. So praise God for his mercy and his grace to me who deserved none of it.

 

[webdog]

Just be yourself, learn and you will learn the voices that are worth listening to, there are good and solid voices....on both sides of the aisle. There are also some who are just noise.

I think he already encountered the nails on the chalkboard

 

[Revmitchell]

In fact, arrogant Calvinist is an oxymoron.

Probably one of the dumbest and most false claims ever made.

 

[12strings]

Probably one of the dumbest and most false claims ever made.

I partially agree, because Calvinists are humans, and all humans are arrogant in on way or another.

Edited to say: I don't really think its the dumbest thing ever said, but in actual fact, it is not accurate, as there are many arrogant calvinists...though there shouldn't be, as a proper understanding of election SHOULD foster humility.

As to the Dumbest things ever said, I think this one is worse:

"Smoking Kills, and when you die, you've lost a very important part of your life."

 

[Tom Butler]

Probably one of the dumbest and most false claims ever made.

Let me clarify. I said arrogant Calvinist is an oxymoron because I believe that no Calvinist (or any other believer) should be. I also said in an earlier post that I don't know any.

There may be some out there, I've just never met one.

Here's the definition of arrogant:
1.
making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.
2. characterized by or proceeding from arrogance, or a sense of superiority, self-importance, or entitlement: arrogant claims.

For goodness sake, what would any believer, Calvinist or non-Calvinist, have to be arrogant about?

 

[Revmitchell]

For goodness sake, what would any believer, Calvinist or non-Calvinist, have to be arrogant about?

That is a good question. But what we know for sure is it is a recognized issue among calvinists where many cals are admitting to it themselves. Piper and a few others have addressed it.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

All you have offered is your thoughts thus your entire argument is arbitrary.

When it gets down to it, that's all anyone has to offer, is their opinion. Even the learned theologians everyone quotes have essentially given only an opinion, though some may be more knowledge based than others. God bless.

One misconception is that Calvinism produces arrogance. I disagree. If anything, it should produce deep humility and gratitude. I don't know a single Calvinist whom I consider arrogant. In fact, arrogant Calvinist is an oxymoron.

Likely it should be, and yet I've met a lot of arrogant Calvinists.

Let me clarify. I said arrogant Calvinist is an oxymoron because I believe that no Calvinist (or any other believer) should be. I also said in an earlier post that I don't know any.

That is probably more of a fortunate accident than an indication of what Calvinism produces.

And then Romans 9 comes to mind:

If I read Romans 9 correctly, and I believe I do, and follow through to the end of chapter eleven, it appears to me to explain why God chose Israel, and how some of the chosen fail nonetheless. It doesn't appear to deal with individuals at all. If Calvinism is in error, that is its biggest failing.

 

[Tom Butler]

Likely it should be, and yet I've met a lot of arrogant Calvinists.

You can help me here. How do arrogant Calvinist behave? How do you spot their arrogance. How does it display itself?

If I read Romans 9 correctly, and I believe I do, and follow through to the end of chapter eleven, it appears to me to explain why God chose Israel, and how some of the chosen fail nonetheless. It doesn't appear to deal with individuals at all. If Calvinism is in error, that is its biggest failing.

But Paul quoted God as saying He loved Jacob but hated Esau. He referred to them as twins, individuals. I know that there is an application that can be made regarding God's choosing Israel as a favored nation. But the passage itself refers to individuals.

But however you interpret that passage, the answer is still the same. The chosen have no grounds for arrogance and pride, and a Calvinist who displays arrogance also displays ignorance, while at the same time raising doubt that he believes what he professes to believe.

 

[Iconoclast]

TisMe

Hello tisme...I am not sure if we have interacted before...if not welcome to the BB.

People accuse Calvinism as being wrong because they say it denies free-will. That is not what Calvinists believe.

12 strings gave a solid response to this on this thread. I am one who denies "free will exists".Man does have a will ...self will...however it is bound by his nature which is hostile to God and His Holy Word.

They deem the choices made in the Bible free-will.

I do not....Choice is choice....it has nothing to do with the condition of the will....You have already noticed some use a term ....free moral agency.

There is so much sinning bearing false witness in the flesh of men.

All 9th commandment violations are sinful and a waste of time in that it avoids confronting the scriptural issue.

Ask any Calvinist, and they will tell you they believe man has a free-will,

This Calvinist will never say that to you or anyone else.:thumbs:

so what are they really saying then?

Most desire to steer clear of carnal human philosophy...and develop a biblical philosophy that is as restored Image -bearers ...we are to think God's thoughts after Him....as He is perfect in all His ways. Isa 55.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

What Calvinists are wrong about is they believe they are premade for salvation like robots,

No biblical Calvinist believes this....so when someone who opposes these teachings of scripture suggests this.....it is met with two different reactions.
It shows the person who has heard this idea is being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. Sometimes they have not really heard a reasonable teaching of the verses that teach those things most surely believed among us.....like this-
http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

Take a detailed look at this confession of faith that has been held by many baptists.Obviously you need to look at the verses offered:thumbs:

which puffs up.

Any truth held with non-gospel motives can puff up.However this charge is brought by those who do not grasp the core of the teaching and speak against that which they do not yet understand.

They don't think they were premade for hell

,

All men are conceived as children of wrath even as others we are told in Eph2......But God who is rich in Mercy......makes the difference.

but for heaven, because God saved them so they could believe.

God saves us from our sins....Saving faith is a gift from God...believe is the result of being given a "new heart". God does not open the sinners heart, he does not want their sinful heart....He by the Spirit brings a dead sinner to life by giving a new heart.

Their spirit can not sense it is wrong for God to premake people for just hell or heaven.

Friend...it is not wrong for God to do anything he in His Holy wisdom has purposed to do.If God wanted to send us all to hell he can quite justly.
In great Love He has purposed to save a multitude which no man can number in Jesus.

They kill the image of God, because they say in order to come out of total depravity (a false teaching),

Why do you believe this teaching is not biblical?

they can't come to the cross from the image of God in which they are made (this first grace), but that God had to have unconditionally premade them irresistibly and limited,

If God does not seek and save sinners.....they perish ...all of them...no man seeks God...no not one.

like the Arian nation or natural selection.

Be careful not to speak evil about the biblical God who has revealed himself.

In other words ....if the teaching of Calvinism ...is the biblical teaching[and it is} and you rail against it.....you rail against the God who has revealed these truths . You do not want to do that do you????

They truly despise Gen. 1.26,27

,

Quite the opposite...the Image-bearer doctrine is a main scriptural root of How and why God restores man,and in fact has predestined it to take place.

the garden choice an Abel's right offering. God foreknew the choice that Abel would make. He chose Abel because He foreknew his choice.

That wrong use of the biblical term foreknowledge which happens many times on BB......has those who say this describing a god who does something based on the fictitious imaged good choices of sinful mankind.
This is not possible .God does not have to look forward...see what might happen....then react.

They really do despise that God can predestine by foreknowing our choice.

Well here you repeat this error, which must be despised because it is not describing the God of the bible. Can you see this?

They have no faith to believe God is all-knowing to have this ability. So instead the Calvinist believes the person needs to be pre-programmed long before to be saved - this is what they mean by "chosen," which is not in the same sense as "chosen" by God predestining by foreknowledge (Rom. 8.29) of our choice.

The biblical term foreknowledge is of persons not events....God deals with His Covenant children by everlasting and eternal love.
3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

"Chosen by premaking" does not glorify God.

TME...to discuss this it would be helpful to use biblical terms ....premaking??

God loved US {the elect} while we were yet sinners...

God does not want to walk with robots,

God does not speak of robots,and neither do Calvinists.

but man made in His image who receives the cross.

No one "receives the cross" unless they are born of God....that is the issue.

Obviously Calvinism is a Pharisaical heresy,

this quite frankly shows you need to do some serious study of scripture as you are wandering into the deep end of the pool, before you can swim...:thumbs:

because though we are still fallen, we are still made in God's image,

That image is not intact but fragmented and distorted by sin and death introduced at the fall.You post as if man is A .OK.

so yes, we can come to the cross, not by the will of the flesh but by that part of the will made in God's image which God allows us to receive the redemptive design

.

This is another novelty not supported by scripture at all...as it says the NATURAL MAN.....Cannot

The image of God can not be destroyed by the mind of a Calvinist.

The damage happened In Adam....not because Calvinists understand the scripture.

Never, and I repeat, never say that God saves you first then you can believe. This is a zombism.

This is a clear denial of biblical regeneration, which Jesus said must take place..jn 3:3-5

If a cult doesn't teach non-OSAS to (control you and passify you), they seem to want to teach Calvinism (pride you up and passify you).

These kind of remarks suggest an evil agenda...be careful my friend or you will drift off from the realm of truth.

In either case, (RCC or Reformers, e.g. puritans, Presbyterians, Lutherans) want to passify you to control you into their system. It is not so pure or presbyter is it? Luther was notoriously confused, for he couldn't let go of the false teaching of total depravity while contradictorily still believing in resistible grace.

Your error about the fall is now leading to shared ignorance of historical reality.

those who know anything about Lutheranism know this matter always gets shoved under the rug. You can't have it both ways. Either we can resist God's grace because we are not totally deprave (though fallen), or we can't because we are zombies. Be "not double tongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

you do not understand this.

I've debated this topic on a forum before but it did not go very far. Thoughts?

Thoughts....sure....you are in over your head at this point...it did not go far because you have not quite entered the ball park yet.

 

[Benjamin]

I am one who denies "free will exists".Man does have a will ...self will...however it is bound by his nature...

Choice is choice....it has nothing to do with the condition of the will....

Bill C: “God determined all things that ever happen, He is Sovereign."
Bob A: "Did God determine the things Jeffrey Dahmer did?"
Bill C: "No, Jeffrey Dahmer did what he did because of his nature."
Bob A: "Who determined Jeffrey Dahmer’s nature?"
Bill C: "God did, He determines all things, He is Sovereign."

:laugh:

 

[Yeshua1]

Bill C: “God determined all things that ever happen, He is Sovereign."
Bob A: "Did God determine the things Jeffrey Dahmer did?"
Bill C: "No, Jeffrey Dahmer did what he did because of his nature."
Bob A: "Who determined Jeffrey Dahmer’s nature?"
Bill C: "God did, He determines all things, He is Sovereign."

:laugh:

Wonder what Paul meant us us as mere pottery trying to tell th almighty just how he should run things more our way?

 

[Benjamin]

My thoughts on Calvinism...

Wonder what Paul meant us us as mere pottery trying to tell th almighty just how he should run things more our way?

Bill C: "Determinism is logically explained to be biblical by Calvinism."
Bob A: "How do you know?"
Bill C: "Because it’s in the Bible."
Bob A: "Why should I believe the Calvinist' view is logically seen in the Bible?"
Bill C: "Because the Bible was written by God."

:thumbs:

 

[Yeshua1]

Bill C: "Determinism is logically explained to be biblical by Calvinism."
Bob A: "How do you know?"
Bill C: "Because it’s in the Bible."
Bob A: "Why should I believe the Calvinist' view is logically seen in the Bible?"
Bill C: "Because the Bible was written by God."

:thumbs:

maybe just easier to say because it is the truth?

 

[Benjamin]

maybe just easier to say because it is the truth?

Exactly, but the point you clearly missed was “how” you say it is the truth. But it’s aight, didn’t really expect you to grasp the meaning, its deep, don’t hurt yourself by trying to get in over your head on this one…I momentarily forgot where I was at…nevermind.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Exactly, but the point you clearly missed was “how” you say it is the truth. But it’s aight, didn’t really expect you to grasp the meaning, its deep, don’t hurt yourself by trying to get in over your head on this one…I momentarily forgot where I was at…nevermind.

And people on here talk about the Calvinists being snobs and smart-alecks.

 

[Benjamin]

And people on here talk about the Calvinists being snobs and smart-alecks.

Is this your way of calling me a snob and a smart-alecks? :laugh:

 

[Revmitchell]

maybe just easier to say because it is the truth?

Which is an unsubstantiated claim and not credible.

 

[Yeshua1]

Which is an unsubstantiated claim and not credible.

well, at least we can see how ben and van approach coming to this topic with an "open mind!"

 

[Benjamin]

well, at least we can see how ben and van approach coming to this topic with an "open mind!"

Well, that gets right to the heart of the matter at hand and settles it doesn't it now? Thanks for the fine demonstration of your methods of reasoning toward getting to the truth here. :thumbs:

 

[Revmitchell]

Well, that gets right to the heart of the matter at hand and settles it doesn't it now? Thanks for the fine demonstration of your methods of getting to the truth here. :thumbs:

You are not a cal so you are to much of a peon to have to prove anything to.