A hard verse for a Calvinist...

Brother Bob said, "No they are not in Hell, I told you they had to go through the door which is Jesus."

So Bob, salvation is determined by man? More specifically....by man's works (i.e. going through a door....doing something)? Kind of like repentance. God looks at us and waits to see (and cheers us on) if we will repent. Then when we do these good deeds (repentance, faith, etc), He will give us salvation (a prize for good behavior)????? Is that how it works?

 

If God is cheering us on as you say wouldn't that be being led by the Spirit. You make a mistake by comparing a man taking heed to the calling as works as in "giving to the poor" and it is not the same. You never consider the fact that "faith without works is dead" and its not talking about "giving to the poor" but its talking about doing what God is cheering you on to do. You see, no I guess you do not, that man is doing what God created him to be able to do, accept his cheering or reject it. You want to make man a "peice of meat laying on a slab", well I got news for you, man is made in the image of God and a living soul.

 

yeah,,, shoe horns are so common that even those who think they don't use them, use them just the same....

blessings,
Ken

 

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.
(2Co 5:14-15 esv)

who is the "us" Paul includes himself with?

can those who are not among the "us" no longer live for themselves, but for Christ?

blessings,
Ken

 

In fact, they use them the most! "This verse simply means..." (the opposite of what it grammatically says).

 

I choose to stay out of the Calvinist/Non-Calvinist discussions because I am neither. But I do read them all with an open mind and remember why I am neither.

I will say Faith is our work and is also that which will put you through the door (I am using Rom 10:9 as my basis).

I know this doesn't help because one of you will say you didn't have a choice to have faith and the other will say man is free to believe.

 

If one claims not to be a Calvinist or a non-Calvinist you have a couple of options . You might be a full-blown Pelagian , a theist , a diest , an atheist or an agnostic . Of course I don't really think the latter two actually exist . Are there other categories that I am not aware of ? Perhaps subdivisions of the former categories might be one's niche . A real Christian would fall into the non-Cal slot if he denies the depravity of all , Christ's unconditional election of His own which Christ came to redeem alone out of humanity and the biblical view of God's sovereignty . Come to think of it , those points of denial would preclude so much of the Bible I would hate to be a non-Cal !

 

So if you don't follow either man's teaching, you are basically a heretic? What if you follow God's teaching, and His Word does not fully suport either?

Or the definition of "total depravity".

"Unconditional election of His own" is an oxymoron. Are "His own" exempt from having faith in Christ? If not, there is a condition---faith.

 

To get back to the OP, clearly the context of the passage, the target audience, is believers, for those that are yet dead in sins are not in any way whatsoever constrained in their conscience by the love of God. To pull out the single phrase "that he died for all, then were all dead" and make doctrine from it is a violation of sound hermaneutics.

And what of it anyway? Let's remember that Calvinism does not deny Christ is the Savior of all men. He is the only savior generally speaking, but in particular for the elect. Here we have to carefully examine our doctrine of reprobation. The main of orthodox calvinism teaches that the OPPORTUNITY of salvation is available to all of mankind, but that the ABILITY to obtain that salvation is mercifully provided to His elect. An illustration is a door which represents salvation. God stands at the door, beckoning all of mankind into the door. Since man, of his own will, will not enter the door, God, of His own will and purpose, chooses some in mercy to actively lead into the door by changing their hearts and wills. Now it is important in this analogy to note that God does not stand in the door to BLOCK the entrance, but rather beckons man to enter.

Blocking the door would illustrate active reprobation. Beckoning without further action would illustrate passive reprobation. I think holding to active reporbation can get us into theological corners.

Most of us believe in common grace; and the sufficiency and effeciency of the atonement. It was sufficient in that it was ABLE to procure the salvation of all mankind. In that sense, and only in that sense, Christ's atonement was the atonement for all people. But that's not where the story ends, and it's the rest of the story that arminians don't get - and that is, that the atonement was also EFFICIENT in that it ACTUALLY procured the salvation of the elect, and therefore nothing can be charged against them before God, seeing He has justified them, and if God be for us, who can be against us? I feel a praise-the-Lord coming on!!

 

Modification of last post: I believe the lost are not effectually constrained in their conscience by the love of God. I do believe in temporal or common constraint, such as in the case of Judas who repented that he had shed innocent blood - this was not salvific repentance, but rather a common repentance, common to the human nature, weilded by a natural conscience.

 

Exactly, I study all of man's idea's, some I agree with and some I don't. I believe in tring the word by the word and letting the spirit lead me.

I have a lot of understanding regarding the word yet try not to make many absolute decisions toward the word. I have a feeling, the day will come and the LORD will come in his glory and we'll sit around the throne and learn we were all wrong and made it way to tough on ourselves.

 

That makes about as much sense as trying to push a chain, and you got an "amen" too, what about that? :type:

 

:laugh:

Anyone who actually believes Calvinism might think they can actually push a chain. :laugh:

 

Yeah, but he signed it in Christ so he's forgiven.

 

Except for me, the greatest theologians in history have believed Calvinism. They may be wrong, but they deserve awe.

When I compare my brain's capacity with theirs, I feel like a toilet bowl looking over the Grand Canyon.

 

Perhaps you overestimate their capacity and underestimate your own. I think it is a common fallacy for people to view things from the past as though it was better, you know the "good old days." Personally, I don't think that scholars from past eras are any better or worse than we have today.

 

Ever read Jonathan Edwards?

 

He's a snoozer. I like Warfield, myself.

 

A little, but I wasn't impressed. Why do you ask?