Life and Death natural and Spiritual Compared

[kyredneck]

Owen was a good Calvinist.

Here's the quote (I'm taking your word for it):

" And many expect he will do so, because they believe he can if he will. But indeed Christ has no such power, no such ability; he cannot save unbelieving, impenitent sinners; for this cannot be done without denying himself, acting contrary to his word, and destroying his own glory. Let none please themselves with such vain imaginations. Christ is able to save all them, and only them, who come to God by him. Whilst you live in sin and unbelief, Christ himself cannot save you." Meditations and Discourses concerning the Glory of Christ. Chapter 1.

This flies in the face of both Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace, two of the five basic fundamental tenets of Calvinism.

FYI, Christ has been 'saving' unbelieving, impenitent sinners since creation.

Christ has no such power

...makes me cringe...

 

[DaveXR650]

Ky. @Iconoclast worked very hard to put up a lengthy post and it's his thread. You brought me onto this thread by mentioning my name. Why don't you address any questions or comments you have regarding Owen to Iconoclast. I don't plan on getting involved in the OP and I do respect Owen, whatever he said, and yes, he said a lot.

Owen would never fly in the face of total depravity or irresistible grace. He just tended to explain them in a depth and detail that we don't usually get into on this board. And he also integrated his theology with preaching and that with a common church member in mind. Let's let Iconoclast take this where he wants. Please stop referencing me in posts in this thread. It's not fair to me or Iconoclast.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

" And many expect he will do so, because they believe he can if he will. But indeed Christ has no such power, no such ability; he cannot save unbelieving, impenitent sinners; for this cannot be done without denying himself, acting contrary to his word, and destroying his own glory.

2 Timothy 2:13. 'If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.' He remains faithful to Himself.

Let none please themselves with such vain imaginations. Christ is able to save all them, and only them, who come to God by him. Whilst you live in sin and unbelief, Christ himself cannot save you." Meditations and Discourses concerning the Glory of Christ. Chapter 1.

Hebrews 7:25. 'Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him.' The text doesn't say anything about Him being able to save those who don't come to God through Him. Herein lies the deadly danger of Hyper-Calvinism. If people are told to look inside themselves to see if they are elect, the devil may well assure them that they are, to their eternal loss. People must be told to look to Christ in repentance and faith and He will assuredly save all those who come to Him in that way.
Christ came to save those whom the Father had given Him; He will not lose even one of them. He did not come to save anyone else. How can I know if I am one of those He came to save? If I have seen myself as a lost sinner, repented of my sins and trusted in Christ alone for the forgiveness of those sins, I can be quite sure that He will save me. 'The one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.'

Thank you, @Iconoclast, for bringing that extended extract from Owen to us. I need to sit down and spend an evening reading it through again. I am sure that if I do so I will increase my understanding of the deep things of God.

 

[kyredneck]

the deadly danger of Hyper-Calvinism.

What a ridiculous thing to say. As if they're Satanists. This just goes to show the extent of your bigotry.

"Deadly dangerous", really?

 

[JonC]

What a ridiculous thing to say. as if they're Satanists. This just goes to show the extent of your bigotry.

"Deadly dangerous", really?

I agree. I don't agree with hyper-Calvinism, Calvinism, or Arminianism. But to present such theologies as deadly dangerous is to equate those positions as unChristian.

Christians are human beings. As such, we will disagree on doctrines and are all capable of a less than perfect understanding of the faith through which we are saved. BUT we are saved through that faith.

 

[DaveXR650]

I agree. I don't agree with hyper-Calvinism, Calvinism, or Arminianism. But to present such theologies as deadly dangerous is to equate those positions as unChristian.

Christians are human beings. As such, we will disagree on doctrines and are all capable of a less than perfect understanding of the faith through which we are saved. BUT we are saved through that faith.

I know that was Martin's post but maybe because he had quoted me quoting Owen - anyway Ky's response alerted me so I'm breaking my own promise and answering.
"But we are saved through that faith". Several times on here I have had hyper-Calvinists take me to task for saying that. If by that they only mean that their understanding is about the order of salvation then that's fine. But I have seen and been involved with too many exchanges on here where hyper-Calvinists take issue with anyone doing anything - even the way you yourself just expressed it. If you really do believe in a complete determinism and a justification from eternity and that salvation is nothing more than realizing in due time that you are elect then you are on shaky ground. But if you believe - you believe and I agree with you on that. But if I apply that same logic to an Arminian who says they just decided to believe the hypers say no, he's lost and I'm wishy-washy in my doctrine for tolerating such heresy. I'm saying that if a hyper-Calvinist goes so far that they go on the attack against someone who says you have to believe then they have "another gospel".

 

[JonC]

I know that was Martin's post but maybe because he had quoted me quoting Owen - anyway Ky's response alerted me so I'm breaking my own promise and answering.
"But we are saved through that faith". Several times on here I have had hyper-Calvinists take me to task for saying that. If by that they only mean that their understanding is about the order of salvation then that's fine. But I have seen and been involved with too many exchanges on here where hyper-Calvinists take issue with anyone doing anything - even the way you yourself just expressed it. If you really do believe in a complete determinism and a justification from eternity and that salvation is nothing more than realizing in due time that you are elect then you are on shaky ground. But if you believe - you believe and I agree with you on that. But if I apply that same logic to an Arminian who says they just decided to believe the hypers say no, he's lost and I'm wishy-washy in my doctrine for tolerating such heresy. I'm saying that if a hyper-Calvinist goes so far that they go on the attack against someone who says you have to believe then they have "another gospel".

I understand.

Calvinists often accuse non-Calvinists of holding another gospel. non-Calvinists often accuse Calvinists of holding another gospel. I, and most of Christianity (including a few here) reject the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement and some on this forum would accuse us of believing another gospel.

We cannot let the ignorance of some cause us to adopt their ignorance.

What is truly being argued is different understandings, not different gospels. @Martin Marprelate was wrong to make the accusation (I suspect it was merely a poor choice of words). I agree he isn't the only party in the wrong.

 

[Iconoclast]

Martin Marprelate,

Timothy 2:13. 'If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.' He remains faithful to Himself.
Hebrews 7:25. 'Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him.'

Heb.7:25 is such a strong and helpful verse.

The text doesn't say anything about Him being able to save those who don't come to God through Him. Herein lies the deadly danger of Hyper-Calvinism.

Jesus had announced That indeed All that the Father has given to Him shall come to Him jn.6:37-44. Not one will be cast out.
Jesus will not lose one. There is a fine line here that only mainstream Calvinism navigates correctly.
The ways and the means are ordained by God.

If people are told to look inside themselves to see if they are elect, the devil may well assure them that they are, to their eternal loss. People must be told to look to Christ in repentance and faith and He will assuredly save all those who come to Him in that way

.

Yes

Christ came to save those whom the Father had given Him; He will not lose even one of them. He did not come to save anyone else.

Yes as it was planned in the Covenant of Redemption.
The sinless law keeping as our mediator and surety
The convicting and effectual drawing of the Holy Spirit.
Followed by the PSA. and it is a accomplished redemption.

How can I know if I am one of those He came to save? If I have seen myself as a lost sinner, repented of my sins and trusted in Christ alone for the forgiveness of those sins, I can be quite sure that He will save me. 'The one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.'

I have read about this,lol

 

[kyredneck]

I know that was Martin's post but maybe because he had quoted me quoting Owen - anyway Ky's response alerted me so I'm breaking my own promise and answering.
"But we are saved through that faith". Several times on here I have had hyper-Calvinists take me to task for saying that. If by that they only mean that their understanding is about the order of salvation then that's fine. But I have seen and been involved with too many exchanges on here where hyper-Calvinists take issue with anyone doing anything - even the way you yourself just expressed it. If you really do believe in a complete determinism and a justification from eternity and that salvation is nothing more than realizing in due time that you are elect then you are on shaky ground. But if you believe - you believe and I agree with you on that. But if I apply that same logic to an Arminian who says they just decided to believe the hypers say no, he's lost and I'm wishy-washy in my doctrine for tolerating such heresy. I'm saying that if a hyper-Calvinist goes so far that they go on the attack against someone who says you have to believe then they have "another gospel".

All this multiplicity of words from you just to say, ‘Yes, I agree with @Martin Marprelate, those evil hyper-Calvinists are “deadly dangerous”.

This particular dialogue arose from you quoting Owen basically saying that Christ has no power to change hearts, and this “deadly dangerous” Monergist disagrees. Christ has changed, beforehand, every single heart that has ever came to Him, OT and NT.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What a ridiculous thing to say. As if they're Satanists. This just goes to show the extent of your bigotry.

"Deadly dangerous", really?

Why don't you read my post properly before sounding off.? I did not say that all Hypers were 'deadly dangerous;' nor did I accuse you of being one, though if the cap fits, wear it.
What I said was that there is a deadly danger in Hyper-Calvinism. I then described what that danger was. Not all hypers urge people to look inside themselves to see if they are elect rather than preaching the Gospel, but that IMO is the danger of it. Go and read the post again.

 

[DaveXR650]

All this multiplicity of words from you just to say, ‘Yes, I agree with @Martin Marprelate, those evil hyper-Calvinists are “deadly dangerous”.

This particular dialogue arose from you quoting Owen basically saying that Christ has no power to change hearts, and this “deadly dangerous” Monergist disagrees. Christ has changed, beforehand, every single heart that has ever came to Him, OT and NT.

A "multiplicity of words" when discussing Owen is a given. Look at the OP. Now read the statement by Owen carefully. What he was saying was exactly the issue that comes up with the hyper-Calvinist wing of this board. Owen was saying, and he goes into it with great detail, that Christ saving who he wants does NOT mean that there is a way for someone to be saved without them doing the very things that God himself has degreed concerning salvation. We have to repent and believe and there is simply no salvation without it because God has so ordained.

According to Owen, and every Calvinist that is not a hyper, God indeed has an elect that is comprised of individuals chosen from eternity past and He will infallibly bring them into salvation in due time. But what happens is that the Holy Spirit will quicken and regenerate, Providence will be in operation working circumstances (like Lydia being able to hear Paul), and the word will be preached, taught or read by the individual so that they can repent and believe - which is essential that they do. That is what Owen is saying. There is room within hyper-Calvinism or Primitive Baptist theology for this exact scenario I know.

But there is also a branch of that where the determinism and election are so emphasized that they actually object to preaching that tells people to repent and believe the gospel. Now this is important: If they say that with the only thing in mind being that an elect person will for sure eventually repent and believe the gospel then that is not a different gospel but it is a different approach. But if you start rebuking people for preaching belief and repentance, or, as some do, you actually start teaching that the determinism is so strong that the elect will be saved even if they never believe or never hear the gospel then THAT is a damnable heresy. I don't know anyone on this board who goes that far but some do go to the point of taking offense at telling someone to ask themselves if they have saving faith or asking them to evaluate their walk. That to me is very dangerous. And it is dangerous because the only warrant you have to really know YOU are elect is by the way you walk and what you believe and Owen thought that with the enlightening and quickening power of the Holy Spirit, such self evaluation was necessary and proper.

 

[MrW]

A "multiplicity of words" when discussing Owen is a given. Look at the OP. Now read the statement by Owen carefully. What he was saying was exactly the issue that comes up with the hyper-Calvinist wing of this board. Owen was saying, and he goes into it with great detail, that Christ saving who he wants does NOT mean that there is a way for someone to be saved without them doing the very things that God himself has degreed concerning salvation. We have to repent and believe and there is simply no salvation without it because God has so ordained.

According to Owen, and every Calvinist that is not a hyper, God indeed has an elect that is comprised of individuals chosen from eternity past and He will infallibly bring them into salvation in due time. But what happens is that the Holy Spirit will quicken and regenerate, Providence will be in operation working circumstances (like Lydia being able to hear Paul), and the word will be preached, taught or read by the individual so that they can repent and believe - which is essential that they do. That is what Owen is saying. There is room within hyper-Calvinism or Primitive Baptist theology for this exact scenario I know.

But there is also a branch of that where the determinism and election are so emphasized that they actually object to preaching that tells people to repent and believe the gospel. Now this is important: If they say that with the only thing in mind being that an elect person will for sure eventually repent and believe the gospel then that is not a different gospel but it is a different approach. But if you start rebuking people for preaching belief and repentance, or, as some do, you actually start teaching that the determinism is so strong that the elect will be saved even if they never believe or never hear the gospel then THAT is a damnable heresy. I don't know anyone on this board who goes that far but some do go to the point of taking offense at telling someone to ask themselves if they have saving faith or asking them to evaluate their walk. That to me is very dangerous. And it is dangerous because the only warrant you have to really know YOU are elect is by the way you walk and what you believe and Owen thought that with the enlightening and quickening power of the Holy Spirit, such self evaluation was necessary and proper.

The Primitive Baptist church I grew up in believed if you're elect, you're elect, and you will be in Heaven, even if you were a lifelong muslim, buddhist, or atheist, or never heard the name of Jesus, much believed on Him. That makes the whole Bible a farce.

 

[kyredneck]

The Primitive Baptist church I grew up in

...yet you can't recollect the name of the church, right?

 

[kyredneck]

The Primitive Baptist church I grew up in

The Southern Baptist Church I grew up in placed the burden of other's eternal destiny on the backs of the flock, i.e., slacking soul winners will be responsible for people in hell.

 

[DaveXR650]

The Primitive Baptist church I grew up in believed if you're elect, you're elect, and you will be in Heaven, even if you were a lifelong muslim, buddhist, or atheist, or never heard the name of Jesus, much believed on Him. That makes the whole Bible a farce.

Yes. I think it was you who I heard say that first and I looked it up and it is true. However, that is NOT what all Primitive Baptists believe. I personally know some who the only difference between them and my church is that they don't butcher the music with drums and electric guitars like we do. They are doctrinally sound in every way I am aware of.

 

[MrW]

Yes. I think it was you who I heard say that first and I looked it up and it is true. However, that is NOT what all Primitive Baptists believe. I personally know some who the only difference between them and my church is that they don't butcher the music with drums and electric guitars like we do. They are doctrinally sound in every way I am aware of.

Doctrinally sound, you mean, by the standards of modern-day Calvinism (Reformed Theology).

Which may (or may not) be Biblically sound doctrine. We'll hopefully know in Heaven, for sure.

 

[DaveXR650]

Doctrinally sound, you mean, by the standards of modern-day Calvinism (Reformed Theology).

Which may (or may not) be Biblically sound doctrine. We'll hopefully know in Heaven, for sure.

Yes. And modern day Calvinism has a wide range of understanding of the teachings and of application. Paul Washer and the guys on the I'll Be Honest website and many Baptist churches nowadays have a mild Calvinism that most of the time you would not recognize as Calvinism. All you notice is that they do not employ manipulative techniques for invitations, they do not believe in the type of decisionism where the end all priority is to try to get people to make a decision for Christ, and they do not believe that once saved, you are saved no matter how you live the rest of your life. That is what I am familiar with.

There are Primitive Baptists on here that believe that when you preach, you preach Christ and Him crucified. Upon hearing that, the elect will respond and come to Christ. Some even go so far as to believe that what you are really doing when you come to Christ, is realizing that you have been set apart and saved from eternity past. Moderate Calvinists like myself believe that there is true conviction, wrestling with the issue of your spiritual condition, coming to believe in Christ and an actual coming to Christ for salvation and forgiveness of sin. But we believe this was driven by and to use an old word, wrought by the Holy Spirit. You came by your free will - but that will was enlightened or changed so that you would freely come.

In addition, I believe that anything you say that convinces people of sin, argues that the Bible is true, shows the benefits of Christ and so on is fair game to preach. In other words you are allowed to try to convince and dispute and argue with all your might why someone should believe. You are allowed to appeal to their intellect and will. And you pray God will work from the preachers side and on the heart of the person hearing.

 

[MrW]

...yet you can't recollect the name of the church, right?

They called it by the street name it was on, and appended Primitive Baptist Church. They sold it decades back and moved to another location. I don’t know if any of those Hardshells exist now. The individuals would be about a hundred years old or more. A few somewhat younger. If they have recruited new members I wouldn’t know, since I haven’t even visited in a quarter century.

 

[MrW]

The Southern Baptist Church I grew up in placed the burden of other's eternal destiny on the backs of the flock, i.e., slacking soul winners will be responsible for people in hell.

God has many people and many methods of getting the Gospel to the lost. Nobody will ever be responsible for anyone else going to hell.

My eternity does not depend on anyone other than Christ Jesus.

If you witness, you either plant seeds, water, or reap the harvest, but God gives the increase. If you DON’T do any of that you lose rewards but the person’s salvation depends on God. If you participate with God, you gain a reward; if you don’t, someone else will. God isn’t limited to you nor me. He has an army of people witnessing for Him.

 

[MrW]

People aren’t saved from eternity. We were once the children of wrath. People don’t wake up and realize they’re elect or “already saved” (they aren’t). What they are realizing is the Spirit of God is calling them to repent and believe on, trust in, surrender to, the Lordship of the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.