confused about Calvin

==No because the Bible clearly says that people will end up in the lake of fire (Rev 21:8). If a person ends up in the lake of fire that is pretty solid evidence they were not elect (Jn 6:37-40).

In Christ,
Martin.

 

I agree with Martin.

 

Hello Psalm40.17:

Romans 8:28-30 prove that only certain ones are elect:

"And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. " (Romans 8:28-30, ESV)

Clearly, a simple read of this passage shows that ALL those whom are predestined will be glorified. Since not all are glorified, then not all are elect to life.

By definition, "elect" means choosing some out of others.

And, by the way, Calvin didn't originate this believe, the apostles did, as did Christ. Read John 6 - the whole chapter. Do a search on "elect" or "chosen" in the new testament. It is a wonderful doctrine that maginifies the grace of God and minimizes fallen man.

And, remember, God is not unfair if He chooses to give to some what He is not obligated to give at all. That is what grace and mercy are!

 

How do Calvinists interpret John 3:16?

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

Doesn't "world" mean "world"?

What about "whosoever"?

I agree that all men are "totally depraved"--however, Calvinism's TULIP translates that "total depravity" as "total inability". The Bible teaches that man is perfectly able to make a decision to "believe" on Jesus Christ. There is no teaching in the Bible that man is "elected" to "salvation" or "damnation". When a person chooses to "believe" or "reject" Christ, that person does not "limit" the sovereignty of God. God remains sovereign--but man is accountable--first and foremost to God.

 

In addition---I am not confused about Calvin. I know what Calvinism teaches. The five points of TULIP were taken from Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion--Calvin did not write TULIP. TULIP is found in the Westminster Confession and in the Canons of Dordt.

 

Know you don't know what Calvinism teachs, with all due respect. In fact John Calvin never said anything about a TULIP, this was formulated latter as a practical way to describe God's sovereingty in salvation.

There can be a strong Scriptural case for each of the five points, and even some non-Calvinists recognize this. As to John 3:16-

We don't interpret any differently than anyone else. Whosever means whosoever. The Bible teaches though that apart from God no man would be a whosoever that believes, because man is blinded by his sin, and yes totally unable to save himself.

The Bible time and time again speaks of man as not seeking after God, dead in his sins, and needing spiritual awkening to understand the things of God. Man is totally unable to come to Christ apart from God's grace. Don't you believe this?

 

No from your perspective you are not wrong. But you need to back up in time and relaize that it was God's amazing grace that brought you under conviction, regenerated, and saved you.

In other words, God enabled you to trust Christ as your Savior.

 

Yes it was God's amazing grace that brought me under conviction, saved and regenerated me!! AMEN

 

PTL! I am glad you recognize that.

 

I do wonder, though, why does one need to make his call and election sure, if, by teachings of Calvin, one has no choice in salvation?

 

And "WHY" preach the Gospel, "FOR A WITNESS", a witness to what, God didn't love/chose them??

Predestination makes preaching the Gospel un-necessary, unless a "CHOICE" is involved.

Why, in a nanosecond of eternity, does God have show his "WRATH" to the world and people who will be "blotted out" of the book of the living and "forgotten", even the Saved won't remember them, or the Wrath, on the New Earth.

Why is God going to stage this big show of wrath which no one, but the lost, will remember, what benefit is that to God??

NONE

However recovery of all the "lost souls" that Satan stoled, that benefits God, and it's why Jesus came and the "purpose" of Jesus's coming.

 

Don't assume that I don't know (BTW, did you not mean NO instead of KNOW in your post?)what Calvinism teaches. I have read Pink,James White and lots of Spurgeon. I never said John Calvin wrote or said anything about TULIP--all I said is that the TULIP was TAKEN FROM Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion (I even read some of that--quite dry and boring, I might add). TULIP, or the five points of Calvinism was formulated at the Synod of Dordt, which met in the city of Dordrecht in 1618-19. John Calvin had been dead over 50 years before that time, so obviously, he didn't write those five points of TULIP.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. (Hebrews 11:6)

I believe that salvation is a grace gift--God's Riches At Christ's Expense. Salvation is not earned--all a person needs to do is make a decision to accept this gift. Making a decision is NOT a work and does not limit the sovereignty of God. God does not zap us with salvation. We are not puppets. Grace is not irresistible--many do reject God's gift of salvation, even when they are under the conviction of the Holy Spirit, as in the case of Agrippa:

Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian. (Acts 26:28)

Why would the apostle Paul have to persuade if grace were irresistible? Why would Paul try to persuade anybody, if some are "elected" to salvation and some "elected" to damnation?

 

No. I don't think you would.

Man's will is involved.

I used the illustration before:

A man falls dead. Fortunately, a doctor with all of the necessary tools, knowledge, and authority to revive the man is close by. Can the man at that point ask for anything? No. His nature won't allow it. It is only when his nature is changed into life that his will becomes free to accept the doctor's treatment.

Scripture uses absolute terms like spiritually dead for a reason... and I really don't see how the concept that man is just marred or deformed can fit those terms.

 

And "WHY" preach the Gospel, "FOR A WITNESS", a witness to what, God didn't love/chose them??</font>[/QUOTE] Because God commands it and has chosen the preaching of the gospel as the method for saving the elect.

No it doesn't... and you have certainly been around this debate long enough to know better.

 

A decision is an action. A decision is a cause. In this case, you make it the first cause meaning that salvation is dependent on man's decision and not the finished work of Christ.

That's a fine protest but it is false. A decision is work. Even in our daily experience we meet people who are paid to do the work of decision making.

Further, decisions don't just occur... they follow a process of evaluation between alternatives. That is undeniably work.

And calvinism doesn't teach that we are any more than living people are puppets because they aren't dead.

As you more than likely know, this is the difference between the general call and the effectual call which is perfectly valid unless you are arguing that man can thwart the perfect will of God.

Paul preached the gospel... as did Jonathan Edwards, Spurgeon, et al. The method God chose is not yours or mine to question. Romans 8 and Ephesians 1 among other passages clearly state that God predestines and elects before a person is even alive to make a decision. Even that person's subsequent existence is at the good pleasure of God. IOW's, he ordains each life and knows beforehand who will be saved and lost by both of our ideas.

At least I think you believe in God's omniscience. .

Calvinism doesn't teach that. Hyper calvinism does but it is no more biblical than arminianism.

Arminianism denies the sovereign will of God in salvation. Hypercalvinism denies man's will and accountability. Calvinism allows both.

 

Think about this, all! Calvinism in the final analysis is no different from Arminianism, and vice versa. When the smoke dies down, after I am, I am sure, thoroughly castigated, I will get back and explain why. So far, I have run into exactly four other people who see this. In His grace, Ed

 

Linda,

"whosoever will" says NOTHING of who CAN believe, it only says that all who "will" believe will be saved. God never, ever turns His back on anyone who repents and turns to Christ. Whosoever will do that, will be saved.

But, not all can, as John 6 and John 8 clearly say.

 

Huh?