Featured What is Calvinism?

Sounds like a catholic "gospel"

 

Roman Catholic, Orthodox and many Protestant denominations teach law, which triggers grace. They do not believe in grace alone.

 

Barry,

Having one's sins paid for means that they are no longer culpable for them.
That's one of the terms of the new testament in His blood...
The complete forgiveness of one's sins ( Colossians 2:13-14 ).

Those sins were laid upon Him by God the Father at the cross ( Isaiah 53:1-12 is the prophecy for it and details what would later happen and for whom...see especially Isaiah 53:8 ).
Therefore, if Christ paid for everyone's sins, then no one can be sent to the Lake of Fire.
Payment has been made.

Acceptance of that payment by those for whom it was made, isn't even a term of the covenant.
I don't have to accept Christ's payment for my sins, as it was done without my permission.
That payment was accepted by God, not me.

Also, I think you may be misunderstanding what's being stated...
Payment for sins satisfies God's wrath, holiness and justice towards the person who has had payment made for them.
It does not regenerate.

But it does glorify God the Father for sending His Son,
and granting the recipients of His grace with forgiveness of their sins based on His Son's work for them.

Acts of the Apostles 16:14...
You had to have your heart opened before you were even willing to listen to God's words.

In addition, receiving Christ does not lead to the new birth...
The new birth leads to receiving Christ.
This is what John 1:11-13 clearly spells out...
They are born "of" God, not of blood, nor by the will of the flesh, nor by the will of men.

In other words,
A person that receives Christ is not born again by inheritance...
The Jews thought that they were the children of God because they were the descendants of Abraham, physically, but this is not the case.
They are not born again by their own will or by the will of others, either.

They are born again by God's will ( John 1:13, James 1:18 ).
Look at the words of those carefully, my friend.


Good evening to you.

 

Hello, I have wanted to discuss this topic with people who had an interest in the Calvinism Arminianism debate for a long time! I am not a Calvinist and I am not a follower of Jacobus Arminius because I see flaws in both doctrines and I would love discuss them! May I start with 2 Peter 2:20? This is my first post ever on this site and in fact the only other place I've posted was on the Society for Evangelical Arminianism. I conversed with one of their leaders but it wasn't an open forum like this and that person was too busy to talk about the subject with me personally so i came here.

 

Welcome.

(Warning, I am a Particular Baptist ... which means I believe T.U.L.I.P ... so I was just putting that out there right up front.)

Sure, I’d be happy to chat.

[2 Peter 2:17-22 NASB95]
17 These are springs without water and mists driven by a storm, for whom the black darkness has been reserved. 18 For speaking out arrogant [words] of vanity they entice by fleshly desires, by sensuality, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error, 19 promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved. 20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21 For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. 22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT," and, "A sow, after washing, [returns] to wallowing in the mire."​

So what about 2 Peter 2:20?
The general topic of the chapter is “False Prophets”.

 

A LOT has been written about 2 Peter 2:20 and for a long time I thought this was the verse that proves someone could lose their salvation, but God had mercy on me and I believe gave me an epiphany. The idea that some of the writers of the New Testament knew each other and influenced each other's doctrine is not my idea, "other people" believe John 15 influenced Paul's Romans chapter 11 so is it possible that Peter and John (who were close friends) had the same concept of being overcome and overcoming? John describes overcoming and it sounds like salvation so being overcome would mean the loss of someone’s salvation correct? Wait-and-see…

1 John 5:4; For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. — NASB

Clearly an overcomer has faith and they are saved so when 2 Peter says someone is entangled AGAIN and overcame that would have to be loss of salvation?
But then why does Jesus through the Apostle John (Peter’s buddy) in Revelations 2 and 3 say "to he that overcomes He will give things”; are they only new converts He is calling to or is He talking to His church that screwed up and if they overcome AGAIN they will get his gifts?
Rev 2:5, 7, 11, 16, 17, 22, 26, 3:3, 5, 12, 19
So if these conquerors (which is the same Greek word that Peter uses for overcome [Nikao]) had been saved and then overcame by sexual sin, idolatry and so forth but then, when told to repent by Jesus, they successfully overcame their sin again then, as strange as it may seem, overcoming must not be a component of salvation since once someone has been enlightened if they fall away it is impossible to renew them AGAIN to "overcoming". That's not exactly how Hebrews 6:4-6 reads but I hope you see my point.
If you didn't get my point this is it; Jesus says that you can overcome again but Hebrew says you can only be saved once so they both can't mean the same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree.

I tend to prefer to deal with scripture through the lens of reality. What does theology look like as real people in the living church that we actually meet during those “one another” moments?

That helps me put a face and a reality to talk about false teachers and wolves in sheep clothing seeking to devour the flock. I have seen people say and do things that register as “oh, that’s what they are talking about”.

I have seen newborn baby Christians just crawling out of some very ugly places and trying to learn to walk. They start to get a little bit of a footing under them, and one of those predators will draw them under their leathery wing and start to plant seeds that will grow into weeds.

Some people seem to have a knack for falling back into trouble. They just can’t seem to let go of something behind them (or it will not let go of them).

Those that KNOW (from experience) the darkness, and then discover the LIGHT (that we never even suspected existed before), are very much aware of what has been lost when we fall back into the darkness of the world. That reality of experience seems to be what 2 Peter 2:20 is referring to.

If men were saved by the will of men and the good works of men and the relentless efforts of men, then our salvation would be something that would be ours to gain or lose. However, many of us who know the darkness, know for certain that we are saved because God loves us. There is no merit on my part, so there is nothing for me to do to gain or lose His decision to love me.

Like the prodigal son, I can only come to my senses and return to the love of my Father and then love Him back.

 

have been here; I have gone astray and have been entangled and overcame by my sin and I have suffered in anguish over it. There were times that I lost my will to go on and life was a constant pain. There were times I wished I wasn't saved and then I even regretted thinking that. If you can lose salvation I must have certainly lost mine many times, so why am I saved now; I certainly feel like I am saved but is that because I finally quit sinning and the Holy Spirit could enter me again or do I FEEL saved because God is not whoopin my butt right now! If you have never been brought this low then maybe you can't relate to 2 Peter 2:20 but I can.

If the end result of my sin was that I died while I was entangled in it then maybe I would've lost my salvation; I have room in my theology for that, but I cannot tolerate the idea that while I was in and out of sin God came and went from me. As heinous as my sin was God's grace was bigger and He never left me but changed my mind from the inside instead. In the long run I overcame because of God's tenacity and because He gave me strength to endure under His rod. Heb 12:7


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Calvinism is simply biblical teaching.

 

I am sorry but I don't have ready access to YouTube or Facebook or the like by personal design so I cannot follow link


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I do understand Calvinism and I do understand Arminianism so I don't favor their doctrine either, but I am much, much closer in my understanding to Calvinism.
One of the conflicts I see immediately with Calvinism is if God decides who is to be saved then why are some nationalities excluded? For example, you cannot say that there are an equal percentage of Christians in Iran as there are in the United States so does God dislike Iranians? (Wikipedia shows the Christian population of Iraq and Iran at less than one half of one percent and in Israel it's only a few percentage points better) Secondly and similar, you may have read that The Book of Life was written before the foundation of the world Revelation 17:8, and I have heard that per Calvinism that only saved people’s names are written in it. With that logic God doesn't like Iranians and He hasn't even written their names in The Book of Life.
This of course assumes that the purpose of the Book of Life is to be a record of everyone who is saved, and I assume this train of thought comes from Revelation 17:8, but if this were true it would be in direct conflict with 1 Tim 2:3, 4 that says God desires everyone to be saved. It would be hypocritical of God to say He wants everyone to be saved while only planning for certain people to reach that goal, but on the other hand, God knows everything so though He would like everyone to be saved He knows everyone won't be saved, so for me the question changes from does God decide who will be saved to why isn't everyone saved if God wants it, and that is another story


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So can anyone tell me how long my posts can be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I would like to start a separate topic against Prevenient Grace but it's a couple pages...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

" And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 and hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth." ( Revelation 5:9 ).

" After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
10 and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb." ( Revelation 7:9 ).

Scripture says that no nationalities are excluded.

There is a difference between professing Christians and "possessing" Christians.

Sure He has.
There are people out of every tongue, tribe and nation written in the Book of Life.

I agree.
This conflict needs resolving, but for me it took a while.

Again I agree.
It is another story.

Keep at it ( 2 Timothy 2:15 ), my friend, and trust Him for the answers to the "contradictions".

 

Reference to 60, or more, of this type of Scripture that are sometimes misunderstood to exalt man (?)

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/gill/The_Cause_of_God_and_Truth_-_John_Gill.pdf


"For if after that they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome; the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his vomit again; and the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire." - 2 Peter 2:20-22

"This Scripture generally stands among the (supposed) proofs of the apostasy of real saints;

and it is said, that the possibility of the final and total falling away of true believers, may be strongly argued from these words.

1. It will be allowed that the persons here spoken of, finally and totally fell away; since they are not only said to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them, but to be again entangled in the pollutions of the world, and overcome;

yea, to turn like the dog to his vomit, and the sow to her wallowing in the mire: so that the latter end with them is worse than the beginning.

Yet, 2. Nothing is said of them which discovers them to have been true believers. They might have externally escaped the pollutions of the world, reformed in their outward lives and conversations, through the national knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ;

professed the way of righteousness, and for a while, visibly walked in it, and submitted to the holy commandments and ordinances of Christ, and yet not have been partakers of the grace of God;

nor is it evident that the apostle here speaks of such who had obtained like precious faith with them; but of some third persons distinct from them.

Perhaps the highest character given them is in verse 18, which is, that they were such who were clean, ontwj, truly and really, as Dr. Whitby renders the word, escaped from them who live evn pla,nh, in error;

which, he observes, is to be understood not of judgment, but of deceitful lusts.

But let it be considered that there are different readings of this text; some copies, instead of o[ntwj read ovli,gwj within a little, or almost, so the Alexandrian MS. in the Polyglott Bible, and two books of Beza’s; others ovli,gon;

so the Complutensian edition, and the King of Spain’s Bible; agreeably the Vulgate Latin renders it paululum, a very little, or a very little time.

The Syriac version reads it lylq almb, in a .few words, or almost; and, according to the Ethiopic version, a few persons are designed.

From all which, this sense of the words may be collected, that there were some few persons, who, in some few instances, had almost, or within a very little, or for a little time, escaped from such who lived in error, being carried away with divers and strange doctrines.

But admitting that o[ntwjv is the true reading, and that pla,nh signifies not error of judgment, but deceitful lusts;

it is possible that men may truly and really escape, not only from idolaters and false tethers, and so have the form of sound doctrine, whilst they deny the power of it, but also reform and withdraw from openly profane and scandalous sinners, and yet not be true believers, as it appears these were not; since they openly turned to, and appeared to be what they really were;

as the dog turns to his own vomit, and the sow to her wallowing in the mire."

I always check Gill, first. He knows The Lord pretty soberly, and therefore, Honorably.

 

So Calvinist believe only saved people are in the book and Arminianism believes only what; that people have their names written in the book after they are saved? This idea is also contradictory to Rev 17:8. The fact is that there is no supporting scripture that says names are written in the book at any other point than before the foundation of the world. Also, I would like to point out there isn't scripture saying that the book is a record of saved people, believe it or not, so what else could it be? I believe it is a record of everyone who God declared would be born: a genealogy of all of creation and everybody's name starts out in it! Instead of The Book of Life being a record of salvations it is a book of creation. This thought will bother some people because if everybody's name is in the book then there are people in it that aren't presently saved and my never be saved, so it is possible that only people who are never saved are those that have their names blotted out from it, and so the Book of Life is no longer proof that a Christian can lose their salvation except…
Jesus in Revelation 3:5 talking to the Churches (saved people) says that He will not blot their names out of the Book if they overcome, so if Jesus is telling Christian people of His Church to repent, (3:3) and if they don’t He will blot their names from the Book you have a clear instance of Jesus threatening to “ex-communicate” saved persons. This verse may point someone to freewill being the culprit but I understand the power that world, the flesh and Satan have to manipulate our will and I have hope that God won't let those ruin me and I know ultimately He is sovereign because nobody, not even myself, can take my name out of His book! You can sin all your life ( I STRONGLY don't recommend it though) and you can beg God to blot your name from His book but it is ultimately His choice and until your name is blotted out of His book there is still hope for you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Calvinist, Not only the most humble Christians but the most honest too huh?


Catholic teaching pretty clear if you think you can save yourself that's excommunication.

We just don't believe in a Faith devoid of LOVE that is EVIL as scripture states 1 Corinthians 13.

 

Roman Catholic Church at the council of Trent declared justification by faith and merit. To remain saved you must merit your salvation by doing the sacraments, by doing works by doing, doing, doing.

Grace and the cross are minor things since merited favor is most important.

Paul called the Roman Catholic Church anathema when he spoke to the Galatians and told them they could not fall back into the law and be saved. Rome is all about salvation by the law.
However, if it makes you feel better, all free will doctrines are law-based salvation by merit teachings. Syncretism is a doctrine from Satan.

 

Rome made it black and white in regards to salvation, for its either grace alone thru faith alone, or saved by Roman system period!

 

Quote the teaching. Show us more of that Calvinist honesty.


"However, if it makes you feel better, all free will doctrines are law-based salvation by merit teachings. Syncretism is a doctrine from Satan."

In Calvinism SATAN sounds like the good guy, so I'm not offended. Heaven is a room pack with "humble" Calvinists? wow dodged that bullet.


I would be an idiot to argue with my robot for claiming to have free will.