Calvinist/Non-Calvinist - Where exactly am I?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Nothing prevents the worst sinner from receiving eternal life but their own free choice to reject it and nothing accounts for the salvation of the elect but the mercy and grace of God in spite of their foreseen rejection (Psa. 14:2-3).

Both act freely in their choice of rejection and reception according to their moral nature. God simply provides a new righteous moral nature for the elect in spite of being equally justly condemned along with the non-elect. There is no just cause that can be found in the elect over the non-elect that makes them deserving of salvation. The cause is found only in the good pleasure of God to be glorfied in the elect by His grace and to be glorified in the non-elect by their just condemnation as both are equally condemned according to their own merits. I am what I am by the grace of God and there go I but by His grace.

But if we are all sinners and in reality incapable of selecting to believe on Christ....then the reprobate really is incapable of belief....right! In other word's, God selects us to be the saved through grace and the reprobate is out of luck ...really w/o grace. Or is there something I'm missing?

 

[The Biblicist]

But if we are all sinners and in reality incapable of selecting to believe on Christ....then the reprobate really is incapable of belief....right! In other word's, God selects us to be the saved through grace and the reprobate is out of luck ...really w/o grace. Or is there something I'm missing?

What I am saying is "election TO salvation" presumes a previous lost and condemned condition or there is no need of salvation. When the potter makes one vessel a vessel of "mercy" the word mercy presumes that the clay is already in a fallen and justly condemned condition. Hence, the clay is already fallen and justly condemned lump of mankind. Hence, all are equally depraved, equally sinners, equally under just condemnation and therefore by principle all could be equally and justly condemned to hell and God would be glorified by his justice. HENCE NONE NEED TO BE CHOSEN TO DAMNATION BECAUSE ALL ARE ALREADY EQUALLY AND JUSTLY DAMNED as the elect "were children of wrath EVEN AS OTHERS."

Election TO salvation is called election "of grace" and therefore God chose out of justly condemned mankind a specific number to be glorified in their salvation by grace. Hence, God is EQUALLY glorified by just condemnation in the non-elect and salvation by grace of the elect but the elect had no more grounds to glory, no more just grounds than the non-elect.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What I am saying is "election TO salvation" presumes a previous lost and condemned condition or there is no need of salvation. When the potter makes one vessel a vessel of "mercy" the word mercy presumes that the clay is already in a fallen and justly condemned condition. Hence, the clay is already fallen and justly condemned lump of mankind. Hence, all are equally depraved, equally sinners, equally under just condemnation and therefore by principle all could be equally and justly condemned to hell and God would be glorified by his justice. HENCE NONE NEED TO BE CHOSEN TO DAMNATION BECAUSE ALL ARE ALREADY EQUALLY AND JUSTLY DAMNED as the elect "were children of wrath EVEN AS OTHERS."

Election TO salvation is called election "of grace" and therefore God chose out of justly condemned mankind a specific number to be glorified in their salvation by grace. Hence, God is EQUALLY glorified by just condemnation in the non-elect and salvation by grace of the elect but the elect had no more grounds to glory, no more just grounds than the non-elect.

Mark, I do understand exactly what you are saying, however you do understand of course why someone who holds to Synergistic theology is boldly apposed to Calvinistic theology & I'm not going to rehash it nor plead there case for them however they do make the point that Election & Particular Atonement is tad amount to stacking the cards against the reprobate. I prefer to believe the reprobate is merely passed over & that if they really could be convinced of believing, then they would be saved..... so I hold out hope that Samuel Rutherford was correct.

When I indicated to Jon that universal atonement destroys the unity & harmony of the Trinity, I meant it. For without the implementation of definite atonement, you would be saying that the members of the Trinity don't quite know what they are doing.

The Father has chosen the Elect, but the Son has died for all & the Spirit has managed to apply the atoning work of Christ to some! Now thats schizophrenic.

 

[BobRyan]

But if we are all sinners and in reality incapable of selecting to believe on Christ....then the reprobate really is incapable of belief....right! In other word's, God selects us to be the saved through grace and the reprobate is out of luck ...really w/o grace. Or is there something I'm missing?

True - but we are blessed by the fact that even in extreme areas such as Calvinism it is admitted that the "drawing of God" - the "supernatural drawing" fully enables the choice to accept the Gospel that depravity disables.

So then how are they even Calvinists given "I will DRAW ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

Simple - they edit and downsize each text that would have informed them of their error.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

So then how are they even Calvinists given "I will DRAW ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

Simple - they edit and downsize each text that would have informed them of their error.

You and a few others repeat this error over and over.

The all men is not every man who ever lived. The context speaks of all men, not the jew only.....all who believe worldwide....

The King comes to Zion;
13 Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.

14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,

15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt.

16 These things understood not his disciples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him......

31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.



You can try 1 jn 2;2 all day and call it an atoning sacrifice...however propitiation means to turn away the wrath......the wrath is not turned away from the unbelieving world in any way...that is why they will appear at the GREAT WHITE THRONE.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
That is true - but the C/A discussion asks about things like "limited atonement" and "is it true or not".

And the Bible itself expresses the plan of Salvation -- "Gospel" in God's terms of "Atonement" - and as we see in 1John 2:2 "Atoning Sacrifice".(NIV)

So once you state the Gospel in the terms of Atonement (which always starts with the sin offering - the cross - the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ for all sins for all time) then ... how did you "define Atonement" and that will determine whether you believe it is "limited or not" and it will define what is meant by that term.

If certain University offers "under grad education for free to all" on a certain set of degrees for their entire state of Rhode Island - will "all be educated"??

If the question is whether the University's facilities and distance-learning program can accommodate the entire state - that can be measured to discover that "all really means all".

But if you mean "Will all be educated - will all get 4 year degrees" in the state of Rhode Island - that answer will be different.

So is it "limited education" or not? Depends on how you define your terms.

Calvinists often know this and so they insist Arminians use the Calvinist's definition. That does not always work out.

Limited Atonement says Christ died for the elect only and did not die for the whole world.

Indeed just as they downsize every text that does not accommodate the tradition of Calvinism - so they take the Bible doctrine on Atonement (in places like Lev 16 DAY of Atonement) and shrink it down to Lev 16:15 "Atoning Sacrifice"

And of course as we all know from 1John 2:2 Christ was made the "Atoning Sacrifice for our sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the whole world".

Thus they directly contradict the unlimited atoning sacrifice of 1John 2:2 and turn it into "Limited Atoning Sacrifice".

Then their next step is to take the entire concept of Atonement in places like Lev 16 and shrink it all down to "Atoning Sacrifice"

Basically getting both scriptures wrong.

No, the Bible does not express itself in terms of the Atonement, 1 John 2:2 reads "Propitiation" which can be defined as "means of salvation."

Depends on how you render the word.

In Isaiah 53:10 Christ is the sin offering - the guilt offering for our sins.

In 1John 2:2 he is the Atoning Sacrifice - using the same Greek word that is also used in Ezek 45:20 "make atonement" -- the same root word as in 1John 2:2

The language in the Bible is more "Atonement and Atoning Sacrifice and sin offering" then the more ambiguous "propitiation" which includes the Greek idea of appeasing the angry deity vs the "God so Loved the World that He GAVE." and "God was in Christ reconciling the World to Himself" Bible concept poured into the doctrine on "Atonement".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

True - but we are blessed by the fact that even in extreme areas such as Calvinism it is admitted that the "drawing of God" - the "supernatural drawing" fully enables the choice to accept the Gospel that depravity disables.

So then how are they even Calvinists given "I will DRAW ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

Simple - they edit and downsize each text that would have informed them of their error.

in Christ,

Bob

Bob, drawing is the ability to come to Christ and the "all" of John 12:32 has already been carefully defined as the very same "all" in John 6:37-39 where NONE "of all" given are lost thus "all" given" are "all" drawn. It is the same "all" defined in John 6:45a that is restricted to the new covenant elect (Isa. 54:13; Jer. 31:33-34; Ezek. 36:26-27; Heb. 8, 10; 2 Cor. 3:3-6). So no contradiction just perfect contextual consistency as John 6 PRECEDES and DEFINES John 12:32 rather than your BACKWARD approach by taking one verse and going BACKWARDS and redefing many preceding verses. Now that is the epitomy of eisgetical schizophrenia.

 

[BobRyan]

So then how are they even Calvinists given "I will DRAW ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

Simple - they edit and downsize each text that would have informed them of their error.

You and a few others repeat this error over and over.

The all men is not every man who ever lived. The context speaks of all men, not the jew only.....all who believe worldwide....

The text does not say "I will draw all who already believe today to Me" and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that.

The text does not say "I will draw ALL who even though they do not believe - will one day believe - to Me" -- and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that is not written there in the text.

What we can all see is that there is a "need" in Calvinism to downsize that text away from the apparent meaning of the text.

Christ states the purpose of his mission in no restricted terms.

Just as we see it in 1John 4 "God sent His Son...to be the savior of the WORLD"

and 2Cor 5 "God was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself"

and 1John 3:16 "God so loved the WORLD".

Never is the mission of Christ described in the downsized and limited terms needed in Calvinism.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

Mark, I do understand exactly what you are saying, however you do understand of course why someone who holds to Synergistic theology is boldly apposed to Calvinistic theology & I'm not going to rehash it nor plead there case for them however they do make the point that Election & Particular Atonement is tad amount to stacking the cards against the reprobate. I prefer to believe the reprobate is merely passed over & that if they really could be convinced of believing, then they would be saved..... so I hold out hope that Samuel Rutherford was correct.

When I indicated to Jon that universal atonement destroys the unity & harmony of the Trinity, I meant it. For without the implementation of definite atonement, you would be saying that the members of the Trinity don't quite know what they are doing.

The Father has chosen the Elect, but the Son has died for all & the Spirit has managed to apply the atoning work of Christ to some! Now thats schizophrenic.

I believe there is a distinction between the SINGULAR race sin which was a corporate act by "one man" wherein the whole human nature of the whole human race acted willfully to rebell against God, and the PLURAL sins of individuals who are later individualized from that common human nature created in Eden. The atonement does not remove the temporary consequences (including physical death) even for the elect but it does remove the eternal penalty of sin (Jn. 1:29) committed by the human race in "one man." Thus atonement removed the eternal penalty for the singular sin of the human race corporately acting in one man - Adam without removing the temporay consequences - fallen nature and temporal death. Thus no INDIVIDUAL man is judged and condemned to hell based upon the corporate action of the human race in one man but rather they are judged "according to" their own works performed in their own individual body and that is why dying infants and those incapable or rational decision are not condemned to hell but are saved exactly as they were condemned.

Hence the atonement is universal for the whole world, reconciling the whole world to God through Christ as it removes the eternal penalty for corporate action without removing the temporal consequences for either the elect or non-elect, nor removing the inability and condemnation for personal sins.

 

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

The text does not say "I will draw all who already believe today to Me" and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that.

no one said it did.

The text does not say "I will draw ALL who even though they do not believe - will one day believe - to Me" -- and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that is not written there in the text.

yes but evidently cals can see that chapter 11 came before chapter twelve...and said this-
50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

What we can all see is that there is a "need" in Calvinism to downsize that text away from the apparent meaning of the text.

no just to understand it correctly.....i do not think ellen g white got it correctly either.

Christ states the purpose of his mission in no restricted terms.

Just as we see it in 1John 4 "God sent His Son...to be the savior of the WORLD"

I severy single person in the world saved?

and 2Cor 5 "God was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself"

Is every single person in the world reconciled to God?

and 1John 3:16 "God so loved the WORLD".

God's love extends worldwide through the gospel,and yet Jesus prayed not for the world.

Never is the mission of Christ described in the downsized and limited terms needed in Calvinism.

Calvinism describes the exact and perfect victory of the cross....not one who God has planned to be saved ,will be lost.:wavey:

 

[Van]

1 John 2:2 translates "hilasmos" as propitiation. Christ is the propitiation or means of salvation. Our sin burden is removed when we are placed in Christ, the circumcision of Christ. Anyone, from the whole world, that is spiritually placed in Christ is propitiated, saved, made blameless, holy and righteous.

In Isaiah 53:10 Christ is said to be our "guilt offering." (The Hebrew, not Greek word, is asham, meaning in this case the compensation needed for our trespass or sin) and God accepted this compensation, this perfect sacrifice, the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. But this sacrifice only provided the means of salvation for the whole world, in order to receive the reconciliation we must be put in Christ and undergo the circumcision of Christ. Christ became the washing machine, but the Father must put us into the washing machine in order to be washed.

In Ezekiel 45:20 the Hebrew word "Kaphar" is translated as reconcile. The picture provided here is that the sprinkling of animal blood cleanses those of the household, just as when God puts an individual spiritually in Christ, the person is cleansed with the blood of the Lamb.

 

[BobRyan]

You can try 1 jn 2;2 all day and call it an atoning sacrifice...however propitiation means to turn away the wrath.. E.

1. The same greek word is used in Ezek 45:20 as "Atonement" see the LXX

2. The NIV rightly translates this in the Bible term - Atoning Sacrifice.

3. Is 53:10 states that Christ is the sin offering --

4. In the Bible model 'God so loved that HE gave" and "God was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself" 2Cor 5. By contrast the greek pagan model was of offering up a sacrifice to appease the angry deity.

Some will appreciate the difference - don't you think?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

1. The same greek word is used in Ezek 45:20 as "Atonement" see the LXX

2. The NIV rightly translates this in the Bible term - Atoning Sacrifice.

3. Is 53:10 states that Christ is the sin offering --

4. In the Bible model 'God so loved that HE gave" and "God was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself" 2Cor 5. By contrast the greek pagan model was of offering up a sacrifice to appease the angry deity.

Some will appreciate the difference - don't you think?

I do not think this changes anything at all. The wrath has not been turned away-

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

There is no propitiation for the goats.There is no peace to the wicked.
the bible salvation describes an actual propitiation...an actual reconciliation.

You are describing something the bible does not teach.

Is 53:10 states that Christ is the sin offering --

Christ is offered for many, not all.

11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

if you are going to ignore the obvious teaching you will never come to truth.

 

[BobRyan]

I do not think this changes anything at all. The wrath has not been turned away-

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

There is no propitiation for the goats.

There is the sin offering of Is 53:10 "For us to whom the stroke was due" -- the lost, the goats, lost mankind. Fallen man is lost -- not saved.

And the pagan concept of "appeasing the angry deity" is not at all the Bible model of "God so LOVED the World that HE gave"

Nor is iit "God was IN Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself".

The wrath of God is revealed against those who reject the Gospel and "loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil". It is in the context of the Gospel and rejection of it that the wicked have to fear "The wrath to come".

This Atonement doctrine of the Bible - is very different from pagan propitiation of the angry deity.

Christ is offered for many, not all.

11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

.

The many of Matt 7 are lost

The "WHOLE WORLD" of 1 John 2:2 have the atoning sacrifice made for them not merely the "few" of Matt 7.

And so also the ALL of John 12:32 "I will DRAW ALL unto Me".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The text does not say "I will draw all who already believe today to Me" and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that.

The text does not say "I will draw ALL who even though they do not believe - will one day believe - to Me" -- and I think both Calvinists and Arminians know that is not written there in the text.

What we can all see is that there is a "need" in Calvinism to downsize that text away from the apparent meaning of the text.

Christ states the purpose of his mission in no restricted terms.

Just as we see it in 1John 4 "God sent His Son...to be the savior of the WORLD"

and 2Cor 5 "God was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself"

and 1John 3:16 "God so loved the WORLD".

Never is the mission of Christ described in the downsized and limited terms needed in Calvinism.

BobRyan

Is every single person in the world reconciled to God?

God's love extends worldwide through the gospel,and yet Jesus prayed not for the world.

Calvinism describes the exact and perfect victory of the cross....not one who God has planned to be saved ,will be lost.:wavey:

"God is not WILLING that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" 2Peter 3.

"He came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him not " John 1.

"He is the light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man... but men loved darkness rather than light bexause their deeds were evil" John 1, John 3.

"God sent His Son...to be the savior of the WORLD" 1John 4.

The reason that the unlimited atoning sacrifice "for the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2 does not result in universalism is because God said the atonement concept goes beyond the "sin offering" - beyond the "Atoning Sacrifice" - it also includes the work of Christ as our High Priest according to God in LEv 16 - it does not end in Lev 16:15 with the sin offering. It includes the work in the Sanctuary in heaven. This is where Paul says the individual case-ty-case work is done "cleansing our conscience from dead works" Heb 9.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

True - but we are blessed by the fact that even in extreme areas such as Calvinism it is admitted that the "drawing of God" - the "supernatural drawing" fully enables the choice to accept the Gospel that depravity disables.

So then how are they even Calvinists given "I will DRAW ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

Simple - they edit and downsize each text that would have informed them of their error.

Bob, drawing is the ability to come to Christ and the "all" of John 12:32 has already been carefully defined

Calvinists admit that the drawing of John 6 and John 12 DOES enable the choice to accept the Gospel that depravity disables.

But they choke on the word "All" in John 12:32 "I will draw ALL unto Me" because it destroys their limited atoning sacrifice concept.

So they "need to define" ALL in such a way that Calvinism can survive the text. It does not.

as the very same "all" in John 6:37-39 where NONE "of all" given are lost thus "all" given" are "all" drawn.

As noted before all triangles are rectangles -- but not all rectangles are triangles -- "ALL" in John 6 that are Drawn AND that choose to HEAR and that learn from God - will come - but that is a compound condition.

At no point does the text say "all drawn are given" nor "All drawn will come to Christ" - we already noted that "Bible detail" in the previous posts.

I don't think many who read that post have forgotten this detail so soon.

in Christ,

Bob