Calvinism needs to add words to scripture

[Ascetic X]

Calvinist theologians and pastors have produced much edifying material. We can learn a lot and grow into Christian maturity by studying their writings and hearing their sermons. Their evangelical zeal is of great benefit to the unsaved. Many of the most popular Bible teachers are Calvinists.

But some caution is advised.

It’s a shame that their foundational premise is unbiblical. They assert that Christ did not die for everyone. They suggest that God has rejected most people and even wills that they be damned.

For Calvinism to exist as a theology, scripture alone will not support it. So extra words are added to scripture.


1 John 2:2
Jesus is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of those for whom Jesus died in the whole world.

2 Peter 3:9
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 those for whom Jesus died should come to repentance.

1 Timothy 2:1-4
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;
Who will have ALL men, those for whom Jesus died, to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Corinthians 5:19,20
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world of those for whom Jesus died unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you, those for whom Jesus died, in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

Acts 17:30
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth ALL men, those for whom Jesus died, every where to repent:

 

[Jerome]

Charles Spurgeon rebuked Calvinists for contorting Scripture to fit their grand scheme:

I Timothy 2:4

"What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I trow not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they, —"that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth."Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place. My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."" —Charles Spurgeon, "Salvation By Knowing the Truth"

 

[DaveXR650]

Charles Spurgeon rebuked Calvinists for contorting Scripture to fit their grand scheme:

Yes he did. He even had the respect of guys like John R. Rice who were highly critical of Calvinism. If you have time, and look on the Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermon archive website and plug in the sermon "Arminianism, Calvinism, and HyperCalvinism, toward the end of the sermon, he goes into the dangers of making Calvinism too much of a rigid "deterministic system". It's good to listen to these guys, who actually did Calvinism the way it's supposed to be done. We should all listen to them.

Just remember, they were both 5 point Calvinists, who wrote and preached extensively on the subject. Lloyd-Jones believed that regeneration comes before faith, as a matter of fact. As long as you remember that, yes indeed. @Ascetic X is right in that if you are not a Calvinist you still don't want to reject all the good material they preached and wrote.

 

[atpollard]

For Calvinism to exist as a theology, scripture alone will not support it. So extra words are added to scripture.

“No one can come to Me [TOTAL INABILITY] unless the Father who sent Me [UNCONDITIONAL] draws him [IRRESISTIBLE]; and I will raise him up on the last day [PRESERVATION].” - John 6:44

Who has ABILITY? (“No one can come”)
What is the CONDITION? (“The Father draws” - period)
Who can RESIST? (“Draw” permits no effective resistance or it was “not drawn” - fish in a net, sword from a sheath)
Who will PERSEVERE? (“Jesus will raise them“ - all the same them that the Father draws).

No extra words, just believing that Jesus meant what He said.

 

[atpollard]

Particular Baptists … upholding Baptist Biblical Truth since 1689.

 

[Ascetic X]

“No one can come to Me [TOTAL INABILITY] unless the Father who sent Me [UNCONDITIONAL] draws him [IRRESISTIBLE]; and I will raise him up on the last day [PRESERVATION].” - John 6:44

Who has ABILITY? (“No one can come”)
What is the CONDITION? (“The Father draws” - period)
Who can RESIST? (“Draw” permits no effective resistance or it was “not drawn” - fish in a net, sword from a sheath)
Who will PERSEVERE? (“Jesus will raise them“ - all the same them that the Father draws).

No extra words, just believing that Jesus meant what He said.

Sorry, but you did indeed add extra words in brackets.

Being drawn to Christ can be resisted as in the case of the rich young ruler; and can also be rejected, as in the case of Judas.

You might say that no one can resist God’s will, for He is sovereign. But apparently most people do resist it.


I Timothy 2:3,4

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.


Matthew 22:14

For many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[Ben1445]

John 6:37
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Of course those means that some of all people and not literally all people.
It means all people groups that the Father gives will come. It couldn’t really mean that God loves all people who He draws or anyone could be saved.

We couldn’t have that now, could we??

 

[atpollard]

Sorry, but you did indeed add extra words in brackets.

Seriously?
The words in brackets simply identify which phrases in the verse correspond to which TULIP doctrines.

That was a pathetic deflection and avoidance of the fact that ONE VERSE supports 4 of the 5 Doctrines of Grace.

 

[atpollard]

Being drawn to Christ can be resisted as in the case of the rich young ruler; and can also be rejected, as in the case of Judas.

Are you saying Jesus lied in John 6:44?