Calvin

[SheepWhisperer]

God left Felix to his own wicked heart's desires.

And PLEASE, don't abuse Revelation 3:20 and compare Felix's situation with a church that had went apostate.

You're comparing apples to porcupines.

No sir. God dealt with Felix' heart by The Holy Ghost, THEN Felix rejected and God allowed him to do so.

And the King of Glory, was knocking on hearts' doors long before Revelation 3:20

Psalm24
6This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob. Selah.

7Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.

8Who is this King of glory? The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle.

 

[MennoSota]

The way it works, is that the Comforter aka Spirit of Truth aka Holy Ghost convicts a person's heart of their Sin, God's Righteousness, and God's Judgement. (see John 15:26, John 14:26 and John 16:8) But regeneration only takes place if the heart believes. Read carefully the following........

Acts 24:25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.
and.....
Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

Though the Holy Ghost dealt with his heart, Felix was neither regenerated nor justified because he chose to put it off. Sir, God convicts men, by His Holy Spirit but he forces no one to believe. And when a person refuses to believe or "puts it off" like Felix did, it's his own fault. He will go to Hell because HE rejected God's free pardon of sin, NOT because God "preordained" that he do so.

You are projecting onto Felix something not shared in the text.
What we read is that Felix trembled when he heard about God's righteousness, temperance and judgement.
What we don't read is that the Holy Spirit convicted Felix.
What is the takeaway?
Felix own self was scared and thus hid and ran away. It is the same thing Adam and Eve did. The difference is that Adam and Eve heard God call out to them and God then showered them with grace.
Felix never heard God's call. He just remained petrified.
Take some time to observe please.

 

[SheepWhisperer]

You are projecting onto Felix something not shared in the text.
What we read is that Felix trembled when he heard about God's righteousness, temperance and judgement.
What we don't read is that the Holy Spirit convicted Felix.
What is the takeaway?
Felix own self was scared and thus hid and ran away. It is the same thing Adam and Eve did. The difference is that Adam and Eve heard God call out to them and God then showered them with grace.
Felix never heard God's call. He just remained petrified.
Take some time to observe please.

Yes Sir.
The Bible says the "Comforter" convinces the world of "sin, righteousness, and judgement" John 16:7,8
And the "Comforter" is the Holy Ghost John 14:26

One says sin, the other says "temperance": but it's referring to the same thing.
Felix was "trembling" because Paul had just told him about HELL!

 

[Reformed]

It helps, I think, to define what you mean by "The reformed view of predestination and election". I say this because Calvin and Luther both seemed to see no contradiction between Calvin's teaching here, and the most noted Reformed scholar taking exception to the doctrines not being mutually exclusive was James Arminius. We need to define "Reformed" in this context.

I specifically mean the Reformed tradition that refuted Arminianism with the Five Solas, and continued with the Puritans, Spurgeon, and the modern-day confessional Presbyterians and Baptists. I do not believe Arminius was Reformed in any sense.

 

[MennoSota]

Yes Sir.
The Bible says the "Comforter" convinces the world of "sin, righteousness, and judgement" John 16:7,8
And the "Comforter" is the Holy Ghost John 14:26

One says sin, the other says "temperance": but it's referring to the same thing.
Felix was "trembling" because Paul had just told him about HELL!

The comforter does convict of sin. This does not mean the person is seeking God.
Felix was scared of his judgment. He never heard God call him to extend grace.

You seem too bullheaded to grasp your passages don't support your presupposition.

 

[SovereignGrace]

No sir. God dealt with Felix' heart by The Holy Ghost, THEN Felix rejected and God allowed him to do so.

And the King of Glory, was knocking on hearts' doors long before Revelation 3:20

Psalm24
6This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob. Selah.

7Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.

8Who is this King of glory? The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle.

No where does it say Felix was being drawn by the Spirit. That's your eisegesis skills in full display.

The context of Psalm 6 is not what you're purporting. This is like a King coming in to His city after a conquest. This is not ppl opening their "heart's doors" for the Christ to come in.

The heart is beyond cure. It is also desperately wicked. That's what Jeremiah 17:9 avers. That's why He must give us a new heart. Read Ezekiel 11:19 and Ezekiel 36:26.

 

[JonC]

I specifically mean the Reformed tradition that refuted Arminianism with the Five Solas, and continued with the Puritans, Spurgeon, and the modern-day confessional Presbyterians and Baptists. I do not believe Arminius was Reformed in any sense.

Thanks for the clarification. We use a different definition and I didn’t want us to be talking past each other.

Your “Reformed Tradition” excludes Calvin by virtue of excluding his statements [post#88] and Arminius (who was more in line with Calvin than was Luther), while my definition is based on the Reformation (it would not only include Arminius but also Luther and even Anabaptist theology).

But yes, I can definitely see how the "Reformed Tradition" as expressed today by Reformed Baptists and some Presbyterian churches would exclude the first of Calvin's statements.

 

[Reformed]

Thanks for the clarification. We use a different definition and I didn’t want us to be talking past each other.

Your “Reformed Tradition” excludes Calvin by virtue of excluding his statements [post#88] and Arminius (who was more in line with Calvin than was Luther), while my definition is based on the Reformation (it would not only include Arminius but also Luther and even Anabaptist theology).

But yes, I can definitely see how the "Reformed Tradition" as expressed today by Reformed Baptists and some Presbyterian churches would exclude the first of Calvin's statements.

After nearly 1000 dark years the Reformation was not a sum total of Protestant theology when Luther posted his 95 theses, it was a beginning. Indeed, the motto of most Reformed theologians is "semper reformanda" (always reforming). That does not mean that Reformation theology is vastly changing today. It has more to do with the formation of Reformation theology from inception to today. Luther got the ball rolling, Calvin went a step further, as did the Puritans et al. That fact has the welcome benefit of taking the wind out of the sails of those critics who claim Baptist Calvinists are followers of John Calvin. We agree with Calvin's take on the doctrines of grace, but we are not bound wholesale to his other theological conclusions.

A eventum, Reformed Baptists have come to their own conclusions on matters such as ecclesiology and the ordinances.

 

[JonC]

After nearly 1000 dark years the Reformation was not a sum total of Protestant theology when Luther posted his 95 theses, it was a beginning. Indeed, the motto of most Reformed theologians is "semper reformanda" (always reforming). That does not mean that Reformation theology is vastly changing today. It has more to do with the formation of Reformation theology from inception to today. Luther got the ball rolling, Calvin went a step further, as did the Puritans et al. That fact has the welcome benefit of taking the wind out of the sails of those critics who claim Baptist Calvinists are followers of John Calvin. We agree with Calvin's take on the doctrines of grace, but we are not bound wholesale to his other theological conclusions.

A eventum, Reformed Baptists have come to their own conclusions on matters such as ecclesiology and the ordinances.

I absolutely agree. In fact, if it were not otherwise we would become what the Reformers fought against. Each generation has to take what they inherited and re-evaluate it in light of Scripture (so often theology is reactionary or is influenced by concerns applicable to another generation).