Calvinist Confusion

[JonC]

I am still confused as to how Jon C can hold to the 5 points of grace and yet not be a Calvinist in at least salvation?
And since it appears denies original Sin and us have sin natures fallen, how can that be reconciled as being viable options to hold?

Still confused? You should have asked.

The reason is that I believe:

1. Men by nature fall short of the glory of God. I do not believe this is because of Adam, but that Adam is the head of natural man (Adam represents mankind, the first man). What we need is not a perfect Lawkeeper but a perfect Lifegiver (spiritual life).
2. Salvation depends on God. God did not choose people to be saved based on the person being saved (we do not merit salvation) but because of His own will.
3. Jesus died so that all men may be saved, but also to save only those who believe (those "given" Him by the Father).
4. God's purposes will not be nullified by man. God will accomplish His plan, to include His plan of redemption.
5. Those who are saved are inherit eternal life.

But I do not believe:

1. That redemption is the righteousness of God worked in Christ through the Law.
2. Our righteousness in Christ is based on Christ's "perfect lawkeeping".
3. God punished Christ with the punishment reserved for wicked men in order to satisfy the demands of divine justice.
4. That God separated Himself from Christ on the Cross because his is the punishment the lost will experience at Judgment.
5. That there are people who have lived, are alive, or will be born for whom Christ did not die.

I disagree with the context Calvinism applies to the Atonement, which means that I look at how Christ died for man (what was done) differently.

 

[The Biblicist]

Still confused? You should have asked.

The reason is that I believe:

1. Men by nature fall short of the glory of God. I do not believe this is because of Adam,

It certainly is not because of you or me as we came into this world condemned already (Jn. 3:17). It is not due to violation of conscience because infants suffer death in the womb before they are conscious of having a conscience.

It is because of Adam as the representative of the human race within the confines of the Garden of Eden the area of testing humanity. It is because all of human nature actually existed and acted in one man - Adam - Rom. 5:12-19.

Paul says it is because of "one man" not "many" or any actions by all other men - Rom. 5:12-19.

 

[The Biblicist]

What we need is not a perfect Lawkeeper but a perfect Lifegiver (spiritual life).

No, what we need is a qualified substitute. A qualified substitute who is not a perfect lawkeeper cannot be a perfect life giver. Where there is no satisfaction of sin there is no life to give to anyone but only another deathgiver.

 

[JonC]

It certainly is not because of you or me as we came into this world condemned already (Jn. 3:17). It is not due to violation of conscience because infants suffer death in the womb before they are conscious of having a conscience

Agreed.

It is because of Adam as the representative of the human race within the confines of the Garden of Eden the area of testing humanity. It is because all of human nature actually existed and acted in one man - Adam - Rom. 5:12-19.

I almost agree. A representative is never a cause. I would word it differently (that Adam represented mankind).

I believe what Adam's transgression shows us is that we are tempted when carried away and enticed by our own lusts. When lust has concieved it gives birth to sin.

 

[JonC]

No, what we need is a qualified substitute. A qualified substitute who is not a perfect lawkeeper cannot be a perfect life giver. Where there is no satisfaction of sin there is no life to give to anyone but only another deathgiver.

This is where we disagree (and why I say even where we agree on summary points the underlying issues are important enough to make our views different).

 

[The Biblicist]

1. That redemption is the righteousness of God worked in Christ through the Law.

I agree with you here. Christ was righteous from birth without the law. However, his righteousness was not contrary to the Law or different than what the law demanded. Our righteousness is by impartation (new birth) and imputation (justification) and glorification not from the law but from Christ's own righteousness which is approved by the Law.

The law of God is merely an imperfect reflection of God's own moral nature in written form. It is imperfect because the letter of the law may be obeyed contrary to the spirit of the Law. Christ is the perfect manifestation of the moral nature of God which the law attempts to convey in written form.

The Law of God originates with God and therefore in principle must be harmonious with his own moral nature and thus a reflection in principle of his nature.

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe what Adam's transgression shows us is that we are tempted when carried away and enticed by our own lusts. When lust has concieved it gives birth to sin.

I want to make sure that I understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that Adam's transgression is merely an immoral standard that aids us ("shows us") in understanding our own depraved nature??

Are you saying our sin is conceived in us apart from an inherent sin nature received directly from Adam?

 

[The Biblicist]

This is where we disagree (and why I say even where we agree on summary points the underlying issues are important enough to make our views different).

No middle ground here! We will just have to disagree.

 

[Yeshua1]

We are called dead in our sins, spiritually dead, and spiritually blind because we are dead in our sins, spiritually dead, and spiritually blind without Christ. Essentially, we are not born saved but in the need of a Savior which is Jesus Christ our Lord.

Now your turn - If we are spiritually dead not because we sin but because we are born with a fallen sin nature from the Fall, then why does Scripture not refer to us as possessing a fallen sin nature from the Fall?

It does, calling us natural men, of the flesh, spiritual dead in our sins and transgressions!

 

[JonC]

I agree with you here. Christ was righteous from birth without the law. However, his righteousness was not contrary to the Law or different than what the law demanded. Our righteousness is by impartation (new birth) and imputation (justification) and glorification not from the law but from Christ's own righteousness which is approved by the Law.

The law of God is merely an imperfect reflection of God's own moral nature in written form. It is imperfect because the letter of the law may be obeyed contrary to the spirit of the Law. Christ is the perfect manifestation of the moral nature of God which the law attempts to convey in written form.

The Law of God originates with God and therefore in principle must be harmonious with his own moral nature and thus a reflection in principle of his nature.

I agree God's righteousness is not contrary to the law or short of its demands. I view the law as a witness to this righteousness, but not the context through which it came. The law is fulfilled in Christ rather than Jesus' Christ-ship (Messiah-ship) fulfilled in the law.

 

[JonC]

It does, calling us natural men, of the flesh, spiritual dead in our sins and transgressions!

That was not what I said, now was it.

The difference between Adam as a representative tather than a cause may be subtile but it is substantial.

 

[The Biblicist]

That was not what I said, now was it.

The difference between Adam as a representative tather than a cause may be subtile but it is substantial.

Is this a response to something I said? Please quote the source you are critiquing. If it is a response to what I say, please be more specific to what precise words that I said you are responding to?

 

[JonC]

Is this a response to something I said? Please quote the source you are critiquing. If it is a response to what I say, please be more specific to what precise words that I said you are responding to?

No. It was a responce to Y1 and what he had said regarding "sin nature".

 

[JonC]

I want to make sure that I understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that Adam's transgression is merely an immoral standard that aids us ("shows us") in understanding our own depraved nature??

Are you saying our sin is conceived in us apart from an inherent sin nature received directly from Adam?

Sorry. I missed this question (my son is on his high school skeet team and we were at the range with his team).

I am saying Adam is our representative in that he is who we are. I do not believe Adam's nature changed from a perfect human nature to an imperfect human nature. Instead I believe Adam was carried away by his own lusts (by the flesh) and surrendered to temptation (sinned) and fell short of God's glory.

So I believe the Word was made flesh like us, only without sin (where Adam sinned Christ did not).

I hope that helps. I was primarly addressing @Yeshua1 as he decided to ask again (about the millionth time), perhaps expecting a different answer. I do not think he gets that people can simply (and strongly) disagree.

Edit:

I wanted to add this, @The Biblicist , from one hard head to another ,

Sometimes I think we may get under each other's skin, but I appreciate your arguments.

We do disagree (I doubt we will ever agree on these topics), but you are one of the very few members I've argued with that actually realized he needed to justify the context for his position. Not only that, but you are able to do so.

Other people may share your views, but my experience has been they argue from tradition and ignorance (they cannot justify the basis of their view, so they don't even try). You, on the other hand, point directly to Old Testament elements and argue why these necessitate Christ as the perfect law-keeper. I disagree with you, but I respect you for honestly addressing these things.

What separates us sometimes is not necessarily what we see in Scripture but what we believe the things we see signify. I just wanted to say "kudos" for giving this the thought it deserves and knowing not only what you believe but why you believe it.

 

[The Biblicist]

Edit:

I wanted to add this, @The Biblicist , from one hard head to another ,

Sometimes I think we may get under each other's skin, but I appreciate your arguments.

We do disagree (I doubt we will ever agree on these topics), but you are one of the very few members I've argued with that actually realized he needed to justify the context for his position. Not only that, but you are able to do so.

Other people may share your views, but my experience has been they argue from tradition and ignorance (they cannot justify the basis of their view, so they don't even try). You, on the other hand, point directly to Old Testament elements and argue why these necessitate Christ as the perfect law-keeper. I disagree with you, but I respect you for honestly addressing these things.

What separates us sometimes is not necessarily what we see in Scripture but what we believe the things we see signify. I just wanted to say "kudos" for giving this the thought it deserves and knowing not only what you believe but why you believe it.

Ok, since we have had strong disagreements in the past, I thought it best to start with these comments and tell you I appreciate your comments which I believe display a good attitude and jesture toward me as presented in the above words.

 

[The Biblicist]

Sorry. I missed this question (my son is on his high school skeet team and we were at the range with his team).

understood, trying to be a good dad is more important than any theological discussion.

I am saying Adam is our representative in that he is who we are. I do not believe Adam's nature changed from a perfect human nature to an imperfect human nature. Instead I believe Adam was carried away by his own lusts (by the flesh) and surrendered to temptation (sinned) and fell short of God's glory.

This only causes me to ask further questions. Of course, I believe he is our representative in the garden test but not outside of the garden. Of course, I don't believe Adam's human nature changed to some kind of unhuman nature.

However, I very very very strongly believe the garden sin completely and humanly irreversably totally transformed his moral nature and all of his descendants moral nature. This change is due to spiritual separation between God's Spirit and our human spirit leaving it in a state "without God" and therefore without LIGHT, without LOVE, and without HOLINESS thus without spiritual LIFE as God IS light, IS love and IS holiness and therefore is the source of LIFE. To be without LIGHT is to dwell in spiritual DARKNESS. To be without LIFE is to be spiritually DEAD. To be without holiness is to be DEPRAVED and to be be without love is to be in a state of ENMITY toward God.

This is precisely the descriptions that Paul uses to describe those spiritually dead "without God" (Eph. 2:1; 11) in Ephesians 4:18-19

Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: {blindness: or, hardness }
19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

To be without God is be without light "darkened"
To be without God is to be without life "alienated from the life of God"
To be without God is to be without love "blindness (hardness) of their hearts...past feeling"
To be without God is to be without holiness "given themseles over...to work all uncleaness"

The new birth is the ONLY possible solution to reverse this moral condition of the fallen human nature as new birth is being brought into spiritual union with God and at that point in time when one is brought into to union with God they are brought into union with LIGHT and LIFE and LOVE and HOLINESS.

The prefallen Adam did not exist in this spiritual condition (darkness, dead, enmity and depravity). Post-fallen mankind do not exist in the prefallen Adam condition.

Death is "passed" from Adam to all of his posterity as death does not exist where sin does not exist and therefore this separated spiritual state of death, darkness, enmity and depravity is BEING SINFUL BY NATURE and what is "passed" from fallen Adam to everyone of his posterity is this SINFUL NATURE or CONDITION and the only possible solution for this problem is new birth alone.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 3:45 AM Pacific.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

It certainly is not because of you or me as we came into this world condemned already (Jn. 3:17). It is not due to violation of conscience because infants suffer death in the womb before they are conscious of having a conscience.

It is because of Adam as the representative of the human race within the confines of the Garden of Eden the area of testing humanity. It is because all of human nature actually existed and acted in one man - Adam - Rom. 5:12-19.

Paul says it is because of "one man" not "many" or any actions by all other men - Rom. 5:12-19.

This is exactly right. I am actually preaching on Romans 5:12-21 this Lord's Day, and nothing is more clear than that Adam was our Federal head; what he has done, we have done, in him. The punishment for his fall is also ours, in him (Romans 5:17-18). 'For in Adam, all die.....' If this is not so, we have no reason to believe that '.......in Christ all shall be made alive.'

Christ is also the Federal Head of all those whom the Father has given to Him. 'For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.' Not just forgiven, but made righteous. Christ's perfect righteousness and obedience to the Father's will are credited to those who are 'in Him' when they believe, and their sins are laid upon Christ who pays the penalty for them (2 Corinthians 5:21). Christ's obedience to the Father was not just in His death, but 'unto death' (Philippians 2:8). He was our substitute not just in His death, but also in His life.

 

[JonC]

understood, trying to be a good dad is more important than any theological discussion.



This only causes me to ask further questions. Of course, I believe he is our representative in the garden test but not outside of the garden. Of course, I don't believe Adam's human nature changed to some kind of unhuman nature.

However, I very very very strongly believe the garden sin completely and humanly irreversably totally transformed his moral nature and all of his descendants moral nature. This change is due to spiritual separation between God's Spirit and our human spirit leaving it in a state "without God" and therefore without LIGHT, without LOVE, and without HOLINESS thus without spiritual LIFE as God IS light, IS love and IS holiness and therefore is the source of LIFE. To be without LIGHT is to dwell in spiritual DARKNESS. To be without LIFE is to be spiritually DEAD. To be without holiness is to be DEPRAVED and to be be without love is to be in a state of ENMITY toward God.

This is precisely the descriptions that Paul uses to describe those spiritually dead "without God" (Eph. 2:1; 11) in Ephesians 4:18-19

Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: {blindness: or, hardness }
19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

To be without God is be without light "darkened"
To be without God is to be without life "alienated from the life of God"
To be without God is to be without love "blindness (hardness) of their hearts...past feeling"
To be without God is to be without holiness "given themseles over...to work all uncleaness"

The new birth is the ONLY possible solution to reverse this moral condition of the fallen human nature as new birth is being brought into spiritual union with God and at that point in time when one is brought into to union with God they are brought into union with LIGHT and LIFE and LOVE and HOLINESS.

The prefallen Adam did not exist in this spiritual condition (darkness, dead, enmity and depravity). Post-fallen mankind do not exist in the prefallen Adam condition.

Death is "passed" from Adam to all of his posterity as death does not exist where sin does not exist and therefore this separated spiritual state of death, darkness, enmity and depravity is BEING SINFUL BY NATURE and what is "passed" from fallen Adam to everyone of his posterity is this SINFUL NATURE or CONDITION and the only possible solution for this problem is new birth alone.

Since the thread is approaching its end I don't want to start on a course we can't continue.

I think one difference between our views here may be this "pre-fallen" and "post-fallen" state.

I agree there was a change:

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil

And I agree this resulted in consequences (through Adam's sin death entered the world; God subjected Creation to futility). And I absolutely agree that the only possible solution is a "new birth".

But I do not believe Adam's nature changed. I don't see Adam as a "cause" for human sin but rather a representative of mankind in that man surrenders to the flesh and sins. I believe that Adam, even when God breathed life into him, was flesh and would need a "new-birth".

I suppose you could say that I believe God's command that Adam transgressed is very much like God's Law which Israel transgressed and God's commands to mankind which we all transgress. This shows us who we are and that we need a Savior. I believe it was the same with Adam.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

There seems to be a difference here:
Genesis 1:26. 'Then God said, "Let us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness.'
Genesis 5:3. 'And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image......'