Calvinism needs to add words to scripture

[Martin Marprelate]

This is the request of a finite mind that cannot fathom God.
The result is a weird kind of Gnosticism.

So your mind is infinite and can fathom God, is it? Can it number those things that God plainly tells us can not be numbered?
Since God tells us in more than one place, that He is in charge of salvation, is it not better to leave salvation to Him, and simply to obey Him by preaching His word to all?

 

[DaveXR650]

This is the request of a finite mind that cannot fathom God.
The result is a weird kind of Gnosticism.

There are some inconsistencies in every "system" if strict rules of logic are applied. Most Calvinists like Spurgeon (and Owen), were saying that according to scripture if you come to Christ, you will be saved. And someone please correct me if I'm wrong but they also never mentioned anyone who wanted to come to Christ but wasn't allowed or was rejected because it had been determined that they were not elect. They also claimed God is the one sovereign in salvation. We do have finite minds and can only fathom God accurately when we depend on revealed truth. If you reject Calvinism, are you really prepared to go with the logical necessity of a hypothetical situation where God says to Jesus something like " Well, you have atoned for everyone. Now let's see if anyone is willing at this point to come aboard and accept our invitation".

 

[atpollard]

The hypocrisy when it comes to the word all is amazing.
Not all who are chosen are believers.

We still love our General Baptist brothers and prefer to thing that they "compartmentalize" than practice "hypocrisy".
"All" almost never means "every person without exception".
"All people" do not even DIE (Enoch and Elijah and 1 Corinthians 15:51).

[1Co 15:22 KJV]
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

[1Co 15:51-52 KJV]
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

 

[JesusFan]

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.

Judas was predestined to be the son of perdition, was a devil per lips of Jesus Himself

 

[JesusFan]

The Calvinist “Core Doctrines of Grace (TULIP)“
are not doctrines of Grace, but of predestination.

• Total Depravity: Sin corrupts every part of human nature, making humanity incapable of choosing God.
• Unconditional Election: God chooses individuals for salvation based solely on His will, not foreseen human choice.
• Limited Atonement: Christ’s death was intended specifically for the elect only.
• Irresistible Grace: The elect cannot resist God's saving grace.
• Perseverance of the Saints: Those saved will remain in faith until the end.

There are no scriptures that support this Calvinist heresy.

Jesus and Paul disagree with your viewpoint, as does the Holy Spirit

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I have posted this before, but perhaps some people didn't read it.
1 Tim. 6:10, KJV. 'For the love of money is the root of all evil.'
1 Tim. 6:10, NKJV (and most other versions). 'For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.'
The Greek simply says 'all.' That is why the NKJV places 'kinds of' in italics. But is the love of money a root of every single kind of evil? How about adultery? Idolatry? Drunkenness? No, the love of money is a root of many kinds of evil, but not every single kind.

There used to be a bag of sweets in Britain called 'Liquorice Allsorts.' I don't know if you had them across the pond. There were round ones, triangular ones and square ones, but I don't recall one in the shape of a dodecahedron. Nor were there any in the shape of Westminster Abbey, Mt. Rushmore or the Taj Mahal. There were some with little sugary balls on the outside; there were some with (I think) orangey bits in the middle. But there were none with a vinegar flavour (yuk!). But who is going to be so pedantic as to insist that these sweets be renamed 'Liquorice Somesorts' or Liquorice Severalsorts'?

 

[DaveXR650]

What non-Calvinists object to I think is that an extreme adherence to the sovereignty of God as the only thing allowed to be considered in the salvation of men possibly misrepresents God in his dealings with man. There are scriptures that indicate God is not willing that any should perish. To me the plain interpretation is that when people do perish it is not pleasing to God nor was it his primary will. Yes, overall, his wisdom in all things is always in play and in a sense everything that happens is according to his plan, but it is not out of the question to say that according to scripture at some level God would rather have it that men turn to him in repentance. And logically, in the same sense, God is not having his way in their destruction. And logically, at some level, their free will played a decisive role in their refusal to repent rather than God's sovereignty (as standing alone). This is not the same as saying that your free will is sufficient to you to come to Christ or that your free will is the sovereign issue. There is a balance, and I think that is why guys like Charles Spurgeon are not objected to by non-Calvinists who have read his sermons. The net is cast wide, and the invitation is real and universal and Heaven really does rejoice when someone comes to Christ.

 

[Ascetic X]

Jesus and Paul disagree with your viewpoint, as does the Holy Spirit

Be careful about equating a theologian like Calvin with Jesus, Paul, and the Holy Spirit.

All you are saying, sanctimoniously, is “You are wrong, I am right.”

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Most Calvinists like Spurgeon (and Owen), were saying that according to scripture if you come to Christ, you will be saved.

Not only them but many, many Calvinists (including me ) and, of course, Scripture itself. 'Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved' (Acts 2:21; Romans 10:13; Joel 2:32).
The gate of heaven is wide open: "And the Spirit and the bride say, 'Come!' And let him who hears say, 'Come!' And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely."
But the fact is that men and women will not come of their own accord (John 5:40; 6:44; Romans 5:11); not because God is preventing people who are desperate to come to Christ, but because they have wicked unbelieving hearts and they love their sin too much (John 3:19).
But in His great mercy, God has decreed salvation for a vast crowd of sinful people, given them to the Lord Jesus to redeem at the cost of His precious blood, and calls upon His servants, "Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in that My house may be filled." And they will come in. "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me..." And none will be refused entry. "....And the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out."

 

[JesusFan]

We should always exercise caution.

This is unbiblical. Scripture speaks of 'A great multitude, which no one could number, of all nations tribes, peoples and tongues, standing before the throne.....' If no one can number them, then who are you, may I ask, not only to number them, but to find the insufficient? Also, would you like to explain to me how the number gets any bigger under Pelagianism or Arminianism?

Unfortunately, you have added words to the Scripture. The words 'for the sins of' are not found in any ancient manuscript. Secondly, you are making the assumption that 'the whole world' means 'all the people in the whole world,' which is adding to Scripture again; and thirdly, If the Lord Jesus is the propitiation for all the people in the world, the God is propitiated in respect of all the people in the world and therefore all the people in the world are saved. Is that what you believe?
I am going out in a few minutes, and will deal with the other texts later, save for this last one.

Calvinists do indeed believe that God commands all men everywhere to repent. Hyper-Calvinists may add extra words, but true Calvinists, like Calvin himself, take the words as written in the Bible.

The number actually saved would be less under those systems, as many will 'free " choose to say no way , as its just potentially many will get saved, not for sure many will

 

[JesusFan]

Be careful about equating a theologian like Calvin with Jesus, Paul, and the Holy Spirit.

All you are saying, sanctimoniously, is “You are wrong, I am right.”

No, am saying that what you term to call heresy was taught by them in the scriptures

 

[DaveXR650]

But the fact is that men and women will not come of their own accord (John 5:40; 6:44; Romans 5:11); not because God is preventing people who are desperate to come to Christ, but because they have wicked unbelieving hearts and they love their sin too much (John 3:19).

Yes. And if you don't understand that you will never understand Calvinism. It may very well be that we should be able to know God's will and commands, stop sinning, and accept his conditions for salvation. But will we, and do we? Calvinism says no, as does General Baptist and Arminian theology for that matter. We pray for people in our circle of acquaintances to be saved and we are asking for more than just that they be provided with the necessary information and propositions of the gospel. We are asking for an actual supernatural work on them by the Holy Spirit. We do not ask for them to have an equal chance at salvation like someone else has. Most of the time they have already had that much grace and it is their stupid free will that has kept them where they are so far. We want their free will run over, smacked down, and changed, not appealed to. If you have ever prayed for someone like that then you are at least a partial Calvinist.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yes. And if you don't understand that you will never understand Calvinism. It may very well be that we should be able to know God's will and commands, stop sinning, and accept his conditions for salvation. But will we, and do we? Calvinism says no, as does General Baptist and Arminian theology for that matter. We pray for people in our circle of acquaintances to be saved and we are asking for more than just that they be provided with the necessary information and propositions of the gospel. We are asking for an actual supernatural work on them by the Holy Spirit. We do not ask for them to have an equal chance at salvation like someone else has. Most of the time they have already had that much grace and it is their stupid free will that has kept them where they are so far. We want their free will run over, smacked down, and changed, not appealed to. If you have ever prayed for someone like that then you are at least a partial Calvinist.

Yep! People who don't believe in God's sovereign grace in salvation should never pray for their loved ones to be saved. God stands by and watches, but it's all up to them.

 

[Ben1445]

So your mind is infinite and can fathom God, is it?

I didn’t say that, now did I?

Can it number those things that God plainly tells us can not be numbered?

Have I tried?

Since God tells us in more than one place, that He is in charge of salvation, is it not better to leave salvation to Him,

That is faith

and simply to obey Him by preaching His word to all?

And that is obedience.
Quite certainly.

But I find it a bit outrageous to say that there is no point in just anyone believing in Jesus Christ if John didn’t see them when he saw things to come.

 

[Ben1445]

There are some inconsistencies in every "system" if strict rules of logic are applied.

Generally speaking I would agree with you. But I am not so fatalistic a thinker as to suppose that God’s system has inconsistencies when encountering strict logic. I don’t assume anyone else thinks that way either.

Most Calvinists like Spurgeon (and Owen), were saying that according to scripture if you come to Christ, you will be saved. And someone please correct me if I'm wrong but they also never mentioned anyone who wanted to come to Christ but wasn't allowed or was rejected because it had been determined that they were not elect.

It is the thing that they, or rather definitely, the hyper Calvinist, (which not everyone is, I know. But there are times when I think that the moderate Calvinist is only a person who has not thought their beliefs to the necessary conclusions) assumes by definition of their beliefs. That a person who does not come to God ever had the opportunity to come to Him.

They also claimed God is the one sovereign in salvation.

And certainly anyone who is accurate on salvation does believe in the sovereignty of God. But God’s sovereignty no more makes the sinner a sinner than does a sovereign lord make a subject brought to him for judgment to break the law of the land.
Nor does any correct view of salvation include any merit of deed for the acquisition or retention of salvation.
Salvation is a gift that is entirely of the giver. It is not a fate that will come upon us no matter what we do.

We do have finite minds and can only fathom God accurately when we depend on revealed truth.

Correct. I just stated that the question is not a fair question.

If you reject Calvinism, are you really prepared to go with the logical necessity of a hypothetical situation where God says to Jesus something like " Well, you have atoned for everyone. Now let's see if anyone is willing at this point to come aboard and accept our invitation".

As repulsive as that may sound to a Calvinist, that is not far from the truth.
As a matter of fact, that is what Scripture describes.

1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Note that it is not for the sins from all over the world, but the entire world.

Sin came on all by one man. The free gift comes to all by one man.

Romans 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

You cannot be textually honest with your exegesis and say that “all men” means different things within the same thought.

 

[Ben1445]

I have posted this before, but perhaps some people didn't read it.
1 Tim. 6:10, KJV. 'For the love of money is the root of all evil.'
1 Tim. 6:10, NKJV (and most other versions). 'For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.'
The Greek simply says 'all.' That is why the NKJV places 'kinds of' in italics. But is the love of money a root of every single kind of evil? How about adultery? Idolatry? Drunkenness? No, the love of money is a root of many kinds of evil, but not every single kind.

The love of money is used just that once. Folks who suppose gain is godliness.
The first example that comes to mind of a person who added to themselves beyond what God had given them is Solomon.
Surely what God had given him was enough but he continued to add to himself. What?
He added wives.
Deuteronomy 17:17
Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
1 Kings 11:3
And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
Adultery? Yes


His wives caused his heart to turn from God.
1 Kings 11:4
For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father.

Idolatry? Yes.


Ecclesiastes 2:3
I sought in mine heart to give myself unto wine, yet acquainting mine heart with wisdom; and to lay hold on folly, till I might see what was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life.

Drunkenness? Yes.

I don’t have a hard time believing that the love of worldly possessions is the root of all evil. Money is nothing more than that which is kept in exchange for worldly possessions.

There used to be a bag of sweets in Britain called 'Liquorice Allsorts.' I don't know if you had them across the pond. There were round ones, triangular ones and square ones, but I don't recall one in the shape of a dodecahedron. Nor were there any in the shape of Westminster Abbey, Mt. Rushmore or the Taj Mahal. There were some with little sugary balls on the outside; there were some with (I think) orangey bits in the middle. But there were none with a vinegar flavour (yuk!). But who is going to be so pedantic as to insist that these sweets be renamed 'Liquorice Somesorts' or Liquorice Severalsorts'?

The difference is that their advertising is not, and does not claim to be the Word of God.
I don’t hold them to the same standard.

 

[Ben1445]

What non-Calvinists object to I think is that an extreme adherence to the sovereignty of God as the only thing allowed to be considered in the salvation of men possibly misrepresents God in his dealings with man. There are scriptures that indicate God is not willing that any should perish. To me the plain interpretation is that when people do perish it is not pleasing to God nor was it his primary will. Yes, overall, his wisdom in all things is always in play and in a sense everything that happens is according to his plan, but it is not out of the question to say that according to scripture at some level God would rather have it that men turn to him in repentance. And logically, in the same sense, God is not having his way in their destruction. And logically, at some level, their free will played a decisive role in their refusal to repent rather than God's sovereignty (as standing alone). This is not the same as saying that your free will is sufficient to you to come to Christ or that your free will is the sovereign issue. There is a balance, and I think that is why guys like Charles Spurgeon are not objected to by non-Calvinists who have read his sermons. The net is cast wide, and the invitation is real and universal and Heaven really does rejoice when someone comes to Christ.

There are some distinctions to be made. God’s Word says that “no man seeks after God.” It does not say that no man acknowledges God when He comes to them seeking them.
You are certainly the most honest Calvinist I have ever spoken with. Your willingness to acknowledge the free will that God allows us is commendable.
And folks who believe in free will don’t all, or even most, think that their free will is tracking down and capturing the grace of God.
We believe God is Sovereign yet not fatalistic.
We believe God is merciful.
We believe God is just.
We believe in the grace of God.
As I have been told, and understand and accept, we also use the same Bible and believe it.
Some disagreements seem to me to be a matter of emphasis.

 

[DaveXR650]

Generally speaking I would agree with you. But I am not so fatalistic a thinker as to suppose that God’s system has inconsistencies when encountering strict logic. I don’t assume anyone else thinks that way either.

What I meant was that most Calvinists, certainly guys like Spurgeon and MacArthur talked about the fact that they held parallel truths that they, in their finite minds could not reconcile perfectly, although they believed both to be true. One of these would be man's responsibility to hear and obey the gospel and at the same time God being sovereign in salvation. I admit that this is not a problem for the true free willer who does not believe God is sovereign in salvation, nor is it a problem for the hyper-Calvinist who believes God has nothing to say to the non-elect.

But there are times when I think that the moderate Calvinist is only a person who has not thought their beliefs to the necessary conclusions) assumes by definition of their beliefs.

This I think is a fair observation. Like I said above I don't think it is that moderate Calvinists haven't thought it through but rather they have and yet still are honest enough to admit that they cannot give a perfect explanation. For me, if for instance I pray for someone to be saved, I am praying and desire that God manipulate and even override their free will, if that will help them get saved. Yet I blame the individual for the paths they take and their prior refusal to come to Christ. And, furthermore, if the person never does get saved I believe there is a sense that God was actually disappointed and yes in a way, did not get his will. I admit I can't give a perfect theological explanation, at least one I know of.

As repulsive as that may sound to a Calvinist, that is not far from the truth.
As a matter of fact, that is what Scripture describes.

1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Just to be clear, what I find completely refuted in scripture is the idea that Christ did not die with the idea of saving anyone in particular, or that he was unaware that he would actually save anyone. I do not however; believe that there is anyone who need fear in coming to Christ that there is the possibility that the atonement did not include them. The atonement functionally shut no one out. And I have no problem telling anyone who is asking about the gospel that Christ died for them. Even Jonathan Edwards said in a sermon "Christ has died, all is ready, all that is lacking is your consent".

 

[DaveXR650]

There are some distinctions to be made. God’s Word says that “no man seeks after God.” It does not say that no man acknowledges God when He comes to them seeking them.

You're right. I think there are many scriptures where God seems to address men directly and they seem fully functionally able to listen, understand, and at least ask for mercy. And it is arguable that if at some level there is not some possibility of messing up this drawing of God then the responsibility of men seems to whither to nothing and the Calvinist answer of "who are you to reply against God" is not a sufficient explanation of what happens. John Owen wrote a lot on the dangers of refusing the drawing of the Spirit and rejecting light you are given which to me sounds a lot like resisting grace. I don't have all the answers.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

But I find it a bit outrageous to say that there is no point in just anyone believing in Jesus Christ if John didn’t see them when he saw things to come.

Now come on! Tell me where I have said that or anything approaching it. 'Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.'
The problem with trying to discuss, not just with you, but with several others as well, is that you have conjured up a hobgoblin of Calvinism in your minds that bears no resemblance to the real thing, and nothing I say is going to persuade you that the hobgoblin doesn't really exist. It gets really tiresome!