Why Do Some Believe and Not Others?

[David Lamb]

Agreed all sin but according to calvinism only those chosen before creation can be saved. You said "God chose to save some of those sinners" but that also means that He chose to condemn the others before they had even sinned. But that disagrees with these verses"
John 3:17, John 12:32, 1 Timothy 2:3-4, 1 Timothy 2:5-6, 1 Timothy 4:10 Now these are just a few of the verses that show God loves the whole world and wants the whole world to be saved and yet your view contradicts those verses.

You seem to have some false ideas about what I believe, so I will try to explain what I do believe, which hopefully will be helpful. Yes I do believe that those chosen by God before the foundation of the world will be saved, because they are the ones who will believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Nowhere in the bible, as far as I know, do we read that God actively some people for condemnation. Yes, I agree that there are some verses that say that God wants the whole world to be saved, but if those verses really mean that He wills that every singly person who has ever existed should be saved, that would go against other verses which say that He doesn't save everyone, and those verses which say that God is almighty and does all that He wills, so if He willed for everybody to be saved, He would do it.

You are hanging your theology on one misunderstood verse.

God has determined within Himself that man could only be saved when they are in Him. He did not pick who would be saved but rather how they could be saved.

That's not what the verses about God choosing/electing actually say. They don't say that He just chose the means by which they would be saved - there are other verses that do that, and of course it is true.

Faith is the lynch pin of salvation, no faith no salvation. God by His grace saves those that believe.

I fully agree with that.

The quote shows that he has the order backwards.
The teaching of Five-Point Calvinism is that man is totally unable to do anything to obtain salvation. They state very emphatically that he cannot repent or believe the Gospel. Their teaching is that man cannot believe until he is born-again. This new birth is brought about by God who chooses certain individuals and regenerates them. Those whom He regenerates are then capable of believing by virtue of their new birth. Man does not have a free will by which he is able to come to Christ for salvation.

This is the source of the Boettner quote [The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Page 75]

I just went to look at my copy of he Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, but I couldn't find it - I may have lent it to somebody years ago and not got it back. I wanted to look up what he says there about the importance of faith, but I can't so I won't comment on Boettner's stance.

I agree that that man is totally unable to do anything to obtain salvation. By nature, he is dead in trespasses and sins. I agree too that the new birth is brought about by God. As John wrote:

“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (Joh 1:12-13 NKJV)

Just as we could not bring about our first birth, so we cannot bring about our new birth.

But that is the result of what calvinist do say whether you have used those words or not. Look at the TULIP/DoG.

Calvinist theology has made the good faith offer of salvation moot. If, according to Calvinism, you are not part of this select group chosen before the foundation of the world then you are doomed form the start.

Not so. That is not what I believe. As I stated above, belief on the Lord Jesus Christ is essential for salvation, and those who believe are those whom God chose before the foundation of the world. As the Philippian jailer was told, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

The Gospel call in Calvinism is not a sincere offer. Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election [chosen before the foundation of the world] that will partake of the Limited Atonement [Christ only covered their sins] will then be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace [God does not draw them at all]. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God.

It is a sincere call to sinners to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Whether we are Calvinists or not, we surely all believe that only those who do believe on the Lord Jesus Christ will be saved (unless we're universalists, believing that everybody will eventually be saved no matter what they believe or don't believe).

I hope that gives you a clearer idea of what my beliefs are.

 

[Van]

The topic is in the title. Be nice.

The title is :

Why Do Some Believe and Not Others?​

The only answer must come from explicit scriptural statements, otherwise all we will get are the speculations of people, which are irrelevant.

One post correctly cited the verse (John 8:47) that says the believers must be "of God" because those not "of God" do not "hear" God's words.

But I did not see where "of God" was explained as having specific characteristics. So a Calvinist might speculate "of God" means the person was individually chosen before creation. A non-Calvinist, like myself, might speculate it means someone "open" to God's word, rather than a closed minded person who thinks they know the truth, and therefore will not accept an alternate doctrine. This is somewhat supported by John 6:45 with the statement believers have the capacity to learn from the Father.

Another verse making a similar point is John 10:26. In both these verses, the "of" is a translation of the Greek preposition "ek" which means, locatively, out from something, and metaphorically the basis of something. So if a person is out of a group open to learning from God, then they are "of God" or "of My sheep." These are the people that comprise the fields white for harvest, John 4:35. Among them are the "many" that seek the narrow door, but do not find it. They sought God's truth, but mis-apprehended it.

One final point, most of us had heard the adage to not be too judgmental, to avoid overly filtering what we take in by what meshes with what we have taken in beforehand as truth. We must be open to the reality that we have bought into some fallacies in the past. This is in tension with the adage we must stick to the truth we have been taught in the past, just as Paul explained to his disciples to stick with what he had presented which he received from Christ.

 

[Silverhair]

Yes I do believe that those chosen by God before the foundation of the world will be saved, because they are the ones who will believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

If only those that are chosen B4 the foundation of the world can believe then what happens to those that were not picked?
I agree that the bible does not say God actively condemns man but that is what your view of Eph 1:4 requires. If He has picked out a select group to be saved that logically means that those not picked are condemned, that is unless you think those men could overrule God.

That's not what the verses about God choosing/electing actually say. They don't say that He just chose the means by which they would be saved - there are other verses that do that, and of course it is true.

Look at the verse Eph 1:4 "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love" We are only saved wen we are in Christ.

Notice that it is God choosing what those of us who are in Him {in Christ} will receive (Eph_1:5-14). We are not chosen “to be” in him but instead that those who have repented and believed and are now “in Him” through faith are promised and predestined to an inheritance, adoption, and to be holy and without blame. In Ephesians 1, the only being in the passage that existed before the foundations of the world is Christ, the elect one.

I agree that that man is totally unable to do anything to obtain salvation. By nature, he is dead in trespasses and sins. I agree too that the new birth is brought about by God. As John wrote:

“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (Joh 1:12-13 NKJV)

Just as we could not bring about our first birth, so we cannot bring about our new birth.

I have said many times that only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son. John 1:12-13 says just that. But faith is not a work is it.
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Eph 2:9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Gal 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Rom 11:6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.

Gal 3:2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?

When you read how the bible contrasts works and faith why do calvinists keep making the false claim that faith is a work?

So again John 1:12-13 just confirms what the bible clearly says only God can save and He saves those that believe.

Not so. That is not what I believe. As I stated above, belief on the Lord Jesus Christ is essential for salvation, and those who believe are those whom God chose before the foundation of the world. As the Philippian jailer was told, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

Again what of those that God did not pick. Calvinists work hard to avoid the logical outcome of their theology.
Look at your TULIP/DoG, those are he most soul crushing doctrines that have ever been put forward.
Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election [chosen before the foundation of the world] that will partake of the Limited Atonement [Christ only covered their sins] will then be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. [God does not draw all] So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God. Your own theology precludes this, but you it seems do not want to acknowledge that fact.

It is a sincere call to sinners to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Whether we are Calvinists or not, we surely all believe that only those who do believe on the Lord Jesus Christ will be saved (unless we're universalists, believing that everybody will eventually be saved no matter what they believe or don't believe).

Yes only those that believe will be saved but under the calvinist theology not all can believe can they. Remember it is your theology that says God has to give them faith to believe after they are saved.
So what we have is people saved prior to them actually trusting in the Son of God. That is not a biblical view.

 

[Blank]

One post correctly cited the verse (John 8:47)

John 8:47 KJV
He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

But I did not see where "of God" was explained as having specific characteristics. So a Calvinist might speculate "of God" means the person was individually chosen before creation. A non-Calvinist, like myself, might speculate it means someone "open" to God's word, rather than a closed minded person who thinks they know the truth, and therefore will not accept an alternate doctrine.

Very good, reading through your post, I had to keep switching between a Calvinist cap and a non-Calvinist cap (back-and-forth) lol. Please don't take the follwing question personal, as I have just as many questions for the Calvinist as I have for the non Calvinist.
As a non-Calvinist, how do you go from the natural man's understanding to his understanding of spiritual matters, (such as the Gospel) without being born from above? e.g.
1 Corinthians 2:13-14 KJV
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. [14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Van]

John 8:47 KJV
He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Very good, reading through your post, I had to keep switching between a Calvinist cap and a non-Calvinist cap (back-and-forth) lol. Please don't take the follwing question personal, as I have just as many questions for the Calvinist as I have for the non Calvinist.
As a non-Calvinist, how do you go from the natural man's understanding to his understanding of spiritual matters, (such as the Gospel) without being born from above? e.g.
1 Corinthians 2:13-14 KJV
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. [14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I accept scripture as written, the natural, non-indwelt, lost, unregenerate person "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God." Does this say all the things or some of the things? It does not say. To claim it says "all of the things" is simply (1) adding to scripture by expanding the scope of the statement, and (2) ignoring the context. If you read a few of the following verses, down to 1 Corinthians 3:3, you will see 1 Corinthians 3:1. What does it say that provides context for 1 Corinthians 2:14? Paul speaks to immature Christians (babes in Christ) the same way he speaks to "men of flesh" again referring to natural, non-indwelt, lost unregenerate people, using "spiritual milk," which includes the fundamentals of the gospel. So, contextually 1 Corinthians 2:14 says the natural person receiveth not the "solid food" things of the Spirit of God.

 

[Dave G]

" Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. " ( John 10:24-28 ).

People do not believe on Him, because they are not "of" His sheep.
By the same pronouncement, His sheep believe because:

" And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." ( Acts 13:48 ).

" For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake." ( Philippians 1:29 ).

 

[Charlie24]

" Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. " ( John 10:24-28 ).

People do not believe on Him, because they are not "of" His sheep.
By the same pronouncement, His sheep believe because:

" And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." ( Acts 13:48 ).

" For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake." ( Philippians 1:29 ).

They were not His sheep because they chose not to be His sheep.

Jesus did not meet there qualifications of who the Messiah would be.

Did God place that block in their minds because they were the unlucky ones He chose not to elect?

Those who were ordained to eternal life and believed are the ones that God foreknew would accept the call.

Matt. 11:13-17

"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows,

And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented."

 

[Dave G]

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Charlie, that is exactly what differentiates God's elect, who do hear and understand His words ( John 8:43-47 ), from those that do not;
The Lord's hand that is upon His people, and His choice to reveal Himself to some and not to others ( Matthew 11:25-27 ):

" At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]."

God's people, whom He has chosen mainly from the poor of this world and rich in their faith towards Him ( 1 Corinthians 1:18-31, James 2:5 ) and given to His Son ( John 6:64-65 ), are the recipients of His gifts of grace.
They do not need to work for them, they do not need to "accept" them, neither are their efforts in this life regarded when the Lord decided to save them before the foundation of the world.

They learn to walk worthy of their calling and election, and through the Spirit that indwells them they do indeed mortify ( or put to death ) the deeds of the body ( Romans 8 ).
Where you see believers "necessarily" walking in obedience and doing their part, God's word tells us that it is the evidence of Him doing all the work;
A work that He began in them, and will continue to the day of their bodily redemption ( Philippians 1:6 ) .



I wish you well, sir, and once again...
It is my wish that He someday show you, through His word, all the details that it seems you're missing.

 

[Charlie24]

Charlie, that is exactly what differentiates God's elect, who do hear and understand His words ( John 8:43-47 ), from those that do not;
The Lord's hand that is upon His people, and His choice to reveal Himself to some and not to others ( Matthew 11:25-27 ):

" At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]."

God's people, whom He has chosen mainly from the poor of this world and rich in their faith towards Him ( 1 Corinthians 1:18-31, James 2:5 ), are the recipients of His gifts of grace.
They do not need to work for them, they do not need to "accept" them, neither are their efforts in this life regarded when the Lord decided to save them before the foundation of the world.

They learn to walk worthy of their calling and election, and through the Spirit that indwells them they do indeed mortify ( or put to death ) the deeds of the body ( Romans 8 ).
Where you see believers "necessarily" walking in obedience and doing their part, God's word tells us that it is the evidence of Him doing all the work;
A work that He began in them, and will continue to the day of their bodily redemption ( Philippians 1:6 ) .


I wish you well, sir, and once again...
It is my wish that He someday show you, through His word, all the details that it seems you're missing.

Dave, I like you and respect you, but I have to be straight forward in such matters!

I resent, and object to you accusing my Father of willingly choosing some for heaven and some for hell.

I can't be any more firm in this statement.

Does not the Scripture say, "it is not the Lord's will that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

You have not seeked the Lord to understand what predestination really means. I have tried my best to show you, but I'm not God.

 

[DaveXR650]

It seems we talk past each other in that we don't admit that there are a few things we just don't know. For one thing, it does seem that while we do have a free will and that when anyone is saved they really are choosing to come to Christ the truth is that I don't think we naturally and on our own have any inclination to do so. We don't see as it were, the value of Christ, the reality of our sin, and the seriousness of our situation.

In short, we need God's grace. To a strict Calvinist that means regeneration. To a moderate Calvinist or Arminian that means conviction and enlightenment. To a real free willer it means that God's word and the gospel message should be sufficient to allow someone to be saved or to make them truly guilty for not responding to God. The work on God's part is done on our will and so the actual response will look the same.

I think someone who hears the gospel message is guilty if they don't respond. Most of us have had the benefit of massive grace from God beyond this and can give testimonies of conviction, circumstance events that could not be chance, or a feeling that a light comes on and suddenly we feel it is the most important thing in the world that we come to Christ. While I do not believe that regeneration comes before belief the last point there sure sounds like it.

As for just a hearing of God's word being enough there are also testimonies of that happening and Jonathan Edwards even mentioned that occasionally he thought a soul here and there responds with that. But there again, maybe they were just regenerated a moment before when they heard the gospel message. Truth is, we really don't know.

 

[Dave G]

Does not the Scripture say, "it is not the Lord's will that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Yes it does, Charlie.
But I think you're missing something ...

The context there is the "beloved" from verse 8, not all of mankind;
Is it not?

" But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." ( 2 Peter 3:8-10 ).

So, when I read 2 Peter 3:9 in context with the rest of the passage, I clearly see that the Lord is long-suffering to His elect, not willing that any of them perish, but that all of them come to repentance.


Please read it again, carefully, my friend.

 

[Charlie24]

It seems we talk past each other in that we don't admit that there are a few things we just don't know. For one thing, it does seem that while we do have a free will and that when anyone is saved they really are choosing to come to Christ the truth is that I don't think we naturally and on our own have any inclination to do so. We don't see as it were, the value of Christ, the reality of our sin, and the seriousness of our situation.

In short, we need God's grace. To a strict Calvinist that means regeneration. To a moderate Calvinist or Arminian that means conviction and enlightenment. To a real free willer it means that God's word and the gospel message should be sufficient to allow someone to be saved or to make them truly guilty for not responding to God. The work on God's part is done on our will and so the actual response will look the same.

I think someone who hears the gospel message is guilty if they don't respond. Most of us have had the benefit of massive grace from God beyond this and can give testimonies of conviction, circumstance events that could not be chance, or a feeling that a light comes on and suddenly we feel it is the most important thing in the world that we come to Christ. While I do not believe that regeneration comes before belief the last point there sure sounds like it.

As for just a hearing of God's word being enough there are also testimonies of that happening and Jonathan Edwards even mentioned that occasionally he thought a soul here and there responds with that. But there again, maybe they were just regenerated a moment before when they heard the gospel message. Truth is, we really don't know.

I think there's much truth in what you say here.

I see the Calvinist and the free will believer agreeing perfectly right up to the point of the division. The part where we actually receive our salvation.

I have read Calvin many times and was amazed at how he explained in detail what had not been explained before. He was a brilliant mind.

How he got everything so right in that realm of understanding and stumbled at the very end.

He made the mistake of of assuming predestination is of God choosing the individual, and based his theory of predestination around it.

What he didn't know at that time is what some other reformers were grappling with, man who freely accepts God is predestined to His plan of redemption to be conform to Christ. We were chosen through God's foreknowledge before the foundation of the world and predestined to this plan.

It so similar but yet so far apart.

 

[Charlie24]

Yes it does, Charlie.
But I think you're missing something ...

The context there is the "beloved" from verse 8, not all of mankind;
Is it not?

" But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." ( 2 Peter 3:8-10 ).

So, when I read 2 Peter 3:9 in context with the rest of the passage, I clearly see that the Lord is long-suffering to His elect, not willing that any of them perish, but that all of them come to repentance.


Please read it again, carefully, my friend.

Notice that Peter is speaking in dispensations of time in reference to God's long suffering. Let me see if I can make sense of this for you.

The Church Age has been and is the longest dispensation of time since man was created. During this period of time (the Church Age, some 2,000 years) God has been bringing in the lost through the Gospel of Christ.

Notice Peter is addressing this period of time in vs 8, one day is a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years as one day. Then Peter shows us that God is not slack in His promise even though there is this long period of time. Then Peter skips past this time when God is long suffering toward man, and in vs 10 takes us to the Second Coming.

What I'm so clumsily trying the show you is that Peter is telling us God is long-suffering toward man's salvation stretching out this time period for the sake of saving man. He doesn't want to see man die in his sins, He desires man to see it His way and come to repentance.

 

[Silverhair]

To a moderate Calvinist or Arminian that means conviction and enlightenment. To a real free willer it means that God's word and the gospel message should be sufficient to allow someone to be saved or to make them truly guilty for not responding to God.

Do you not understand that even those you call a "free willer" have responded to the various means that God uses to draw people to Himself. Just like what you call a "moderate Calvinist or Arminian" do. A free willer is just someone that has used their God given free will to evaluate the information that God has presented to them. Is that not what you as a moderate calvinist have done?

From what you have written before you would be a free willer, that is unless you think God forced you to believe. Did you freely respond to the conviction of your sins or to the gospel message? If you did not freely do so then it was determined that you would and then you fall back into what high calvinism.

There are only two options, determinism or free will. And from what you have written you are free will just as the vast majority of Christians are.

So to be clear there is not group called "free willers" that is just an overused pejorative.

 

[Silverhair]

Yes it does, Charlie.
But I think you're missing something ...

The context there is the "beloved" from verse 8, not all of mankind;
Is it not?

" But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." ( 2 Peter 3:8-10 ).

So, when I read 2 Peter 3:9 in context with the rest of the passage, I clearly see that the Lord is long-suffering to His elect, not willing that any of them perish, but that all of them come to repentance.


Please read it again, carefully, my friend.

If I may step into this discussion to add what I see as a relevant point.

God has always been slow to anger (Ex 34:6), and God does not wish that any should perish but wants all to be saved (1Ti_2:4). God is ready to show his mercy upon all (Rom_11:32) and has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but would rather have the wicked turn from his ways and live (Eze_18:23). God does not plan damnation for select individuals making them reprobates but instead gives all a real opportunity to come to repentance.

And when we look at 2Pe 3:9 the question is who are the ALL.

The bible gives a clear answer
1Ti_2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti_2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

So we see that the ALL in 2Pe 3:9 that God is "not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." is the same ALL we see in 1Ti 2:4 that God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Peter is writing to the saints and reminding them of God's love as seen through His long suffering and patience. He has also provided the various means of knowing Him. The reason for the delay in Christ's return is so that all may come to repentance as God's desire is that none should perish.

 

[Charlie24]

Notice that Peter is speaking in dispensations of time in reference to God's long suffering. Let me see if I can make sense of this for you.

The Church Age has been and is the longest dispensation of time since man was created. During this period of time (the Church Age, some 2,000 years) God has been bringing in the lost through the Gospel of Christ.

Notice Peter is addressing this period of time in vs 8, one day is a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years as one day. Then Peter shows us that God is not slack in His promise even though there is this long period of time. Then Peter skips past this time when God is long suffering toward man, and in vs 10 takes us to the Second Coming.

What I'm so clumsily trying the show you is that Peter is telling us God is long-suffering toward man's salvation stretching out this time period for the sake of saving man. He doesn't want to see man die in his sins, He desires man to see it His way and come to repentance.

I'm mowing a weed eating today and I didn't take the time with this subject that I wanted. So let me take this a step further.

After Peter discusses what I've covered, he goes on to the Second Coming in 2 Peter 3:10. In this book he is covering briefly the dispensations.

In vs. 10-13 he is speaking of the coming day of God, the new heavens and the new earth. Then in vs. 14 he begins to sum up what he has said, a summary.

He says, that since we are looking for such things (the things he is covering in these dispensations) keep yourself blameless in the faith.

Then notice what he says in vs. 15, this is the heart of why he is discussing the dispensations.

"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation." So you see that?

In the dispensation of the Church where God is being longsuffering, which we are living in right now, this longsuffering of God is for the salvation of man. This period of time is being stretched out for man because He is not willing that any should perish, and wants all to come to repentance. But we know that God does not always get His way with man, He gives man choice.

Dave, this is a merciful God that has pity on man, He is being longsuffering with man, working with man through His Word from people like me and you to give them the Gospel so He can work with them.

 

[Charlie24]

If I may step into this discussion to add what I see as a relevant point.

God has always been slow to anger (Ex 34:6), and God does not wish that any should perish but wants all to be saved (1Ti_2:4). God is ready to show his mercy upon all (Rom_11:32) and has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but would rather have the wicked turn from his ways and live (Eze_18:23). God does not plan damnation for select individuals making them reprobates but instead gives all a real opportunity to come to repentance.

And when we look at 2Pe 3:9 the question is who are the ALL.

The bible gives a clear answer
1Ti_2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti_2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

So we see that the ALL in 2Pe 3:9 that God is "not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." is the same ALL we see in 1Ti 2:4 that God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Peter is writing to the saints and reminding them of God's love as seen through His long suffering and patience. He has also provided the various means of knowing Him. The reason for the delay in Christ's return is so that all may come to repentance as God's desire is that none should perish.

Silverhair, my Brother, you are always welcome in my conversations. You jump in anytime you like in the future, and I will appreciate your insight.

I was going to mow some more and come back, but since you've joined in I'll take this to the end.

Notice in vs 15-16

"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

Peter is telling the brethren there are many who don't understand these things he is discussing here. They are rebelling against it to their own destruction. That would be "The Longsuffering of the Lord to Salvation.

Then in vs 17, that blows OSAS out of the water, he says.

"Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness."

Peter is warning these brethren to be careful and not get caught up with these "unlearned and unstable" and fall from their own standing in God.

 

[DaveXR650]

Do you not understand that even those you call a "free willer" have responded to the various means that God uses to draw people to Himself. Just like what you call a "moderate Calvinist or Arminian" do. A free willer is just someone that has used their God given free will to evaluate the information that God has presented to them. Is that not what you as a moderate calvinist have done?

From what you have written before you would be a free willer, that is unless you think God forced you to believe. Did you freely respond to the conviction of your sins or to the gospel message? If you did not freely do so then it was determined that you would and then you fall back into what high calvinism.

There are only two options, determinism or free will. And from what you have written you are free will just as the vast majority of Christians are.

So to be clear there is not group called "free willers" that is just an overused pejorative.

I agree with you that "free willers" are responding to the various means that God uses to draw people to himself. But some of them believe that men are virtuous enough that they can and often are searching for truth and for God in order to do his will and are fully capable of responding to the gospel just upon hearing the bare information. It sounds like you don't go that far, but believe that "various means" are used by God or - I assume, they would not come to Christ.

If I wake you up to the truth, or enlighten you, or even if I convince you - have I forced you to believe? If you would not have believed had I not done that then my help was essential and my withholding that help would be fatal - and you have a basic Calvinist view. If this is essential but yet you could still by your own free will reject this calling, then you have a moderate Calvinist or an Arminian view. It all gets very difficult because our lives consist in being convinced of things and having our wills changed all the time. The rest of the time we are trying to do the same to others. That's called life and interaction. This is beyond dispute. I don't mind free will in that you can always choose something else, but in our lives we cannot deny that our free wills are not as autonomous as we would like to think they are. You like Canada more than the U.S.A and you probably root for your home town sports team (curling?) Those are not autonomous choices. Yet if someone like a Calvinist comes along and says that the almighty, all knowing God of the universe, may step in and move you in a way that overwhelms your obviously defective and selfish free will you object? Truthfully, we do have a free will and it will always work to our detriment without God's grace.

One other thing. I use the term "free willer" because I know people get offended with Pelagian or semi-Pelagian. If free willer is also offensive what term should be used for those who believe in the sanctity of their autonomous free will and/or the idea that their free will is not in any way damaged or impaired as far as receiving spiritual things?

 

[Silverhair]

I agree with you that "free willers" are responding to the various means that God uses to draw people to himself. But some of them believe that men are virtuous enough that they can and often are searching for truth and for God in order to do his will and are fully capable of responding to the gospel just upon hearing the bare information. It sounds like you don't go that far, but believe that "various means" are used by God or - I assume, they would not come to Christ.

Why someone would be searching for God that did not even know there was a God to search for is beyond me. Actually man can reach out to / search for God based on basic information. It's called creation and God says we can know of Him through it. Does that mean the person is virtuous enough to save himself NO. God also has told us the gospel is the power of God for salvation so hearing and believing that message is biblically possible.
Creation, conviction of sin, the gospel message are all means that God uses to draw man and man is fully capable of responding to them or of rejecting them.

If I wake you up to the truth, or enlighten you, or even if I convince you - have I forced you to believe? If you would not have believed had I not done that then my help was essential and my withholding that help would be fatal - and you have a basic Calvinist view

But that is not what calvinism says is it. Under calvinism that is not possible as all the choices have been determined by God.
If a person is shown the truth and can either accept it or reject it. That's free will.
All those things you said point to free will "wake you up to the truth, or enlighten you, or even if I convince you". But the calvinist DoG/TULIP does not leave those options open as all has been determined in advance.

I know that what you call moderate calvinsim holds to man having a free will with which to choose but then that is not basic calvinism teaches is it.

Moderate calvinism stands more in line with Arminism or what I would call biblical theology than it does to basic calvinism.

in our lives we cannot deny that our free wills are not as autonomous as we would like to think they are.

If you mean by autonomous free will that we can do anything one would wish to do, eg jump ten feet in the air or fly under ones own power then no he is not autonomous, he is not free to do that.
But if the man has the ability to evaluate various information without outside influences directing the choice he makes then he is actually acting in an autonomous manner.

you probably root for your home town sports team (curling?)

Hockey {boston}, football {do not follow} , soccer {Calgary FC}
No city curling team.

Yet if someone like a Calvinist comes along and says that the almighty, all knowing God of the universe, may step in and move you in a way that overwhelms your obviously defective and selfish free will you object?

If God influences ones choices through the various means He has and the man freely chooses to accept or reject that influence then I see not problem as that is what we see in scripture.
But when God does not influence but rather causes the choice the person will make then I do see a problem.

Whether a mans will is defective and selfish or is correct and kind it is still his free will. If he chooses to respond in faith to the influence of God it is still him that is responding.

But calvinism does not say that God influences the man but rather via Irresistible Grace forces the man to come to Him.

I know the moderate view does not hold to that understanding but why do people still want to call that view calvinism?

One other thing. I use the term "free willer" because I know people get offended with Pelagian or semi-Pelagian. If free willer is also offensive what term should be used for those who believe in the sanctity of their autonomous free will and/or the idea that their free will is not in any way damaged or impaired as far as receiving spiritual things?

I am not sure what you would call them but do you think anyone on this board actually thinks the way you have described "free willer"?

I hold to what scripture shows not what some man or group of men have decided that the bible shows.

God did not remove our free will when Adam sinned and the bible is clear that man is held responsible for the choices they make so the idea that mans free will is damaged or impaired as far as receiving spiritual things seems to be more a man-made idea that a biblical one.

 

[DaveXR650]

But that is not what calvinism says is it. Under calvinism that is not possible as all the choices have been determined by God.
If a person is shown the truth and can either accept it or reject it. That's free will.
All those things you said point to free will "wake you up to the truth, or enlighten you, or even if I convince you". But the calvinist DoG/TULIP does not leave those options open as all has been determined in advance.

I can't speak for Calvinists and there doesn't seem to be an official position since it's not a denomination and has been developed and modified over many years. But Edwards is where I got the idea that you are enlightened by a divine and supernatural light. To me that means now you see something in such a way as you did not before and you then see the value in Christ and his way of salvation. Something has changed in you. If God does that then you did not come up with that yourself. My argument, and I speak personally, not as a representative of any school of thought is that we do indeed have a free will but that our will as a human is not completely self determined. But it is partially. In other words, the light you receive is indeed essential and yet you do have some ability to pursue that new direction or choose to remain in sin because you like it more than the light you now know of. Should you do this, even strict Calvinists like Owen warn that the patience of the Holy Spirit can be stretched to where he withdraws gracious influence, leaving you on your own according to your free will choice, and now in grave danger of never being willing to come to Christ.

To me, the idea that you are totally dependent upon the work of the Holy Spirit or else you won't come to Christ is the way I would see it. But this grace can and is often resisted. This is not unfamiliar to me in the Baptist and non-denominational Bible churches I grew up in. What drew me to Calvinism was not the logic of the theology but the experiential way of Christian living preached by the Puritan era Calvinists which helped me greatly because I was never comfortable with the easy believism which had in a large way taken over evangelical churches in the US at least. Having said that, I have to admit that the idea that something more than persuasion or conviction is going on with this work of the Holy Spirit. The argument that there is a real change or quickening is powerful. Whether it is full on regeneration and that prior to belief is something I don't know. I will discuss it on a board but don't know enough to be dogmatic about it.

I know the moderate view does not hold to that understanding but why do people still want to call that view calvinism?

On a theology debate forum you try to signal where you are basically coming from to help others understand what you're reading. As a Christian in the real world I doubt whether there is any good reason to identify as anything but a believer.

I am not sure what you would call them but do you think anyone on this board actually thinks the way you have described "free willer"?

That's a good question. Where it gets muddy is when someone says that the "word" has power to save and is sufficient for someone to come to Christ. That could mean that whenever the word is preached or read the Holy Spirit is indeed at work in some way on the person hearing the word. But if they mean that the words themselves that explain the gospel, the words on paper, without the Holy Spirit involved in any way, as being sufficient for salvation then that is quite different. You are the most free will oriented regular poster on here and if I understand you correctly you believe the first scenario, where the Holy Spirit's power is necessary indeed, but is also always there when the word of God is being spoken or read. Let me know if I'm wrong.