Calvinists Please Explain Something for Me...

[Iconoclast]

One thing I'll have to retract about the last statement. I will retract calling you deceitful because I can not absolutely PROVE that you knew what I posted was Calvinist doctrine. Which means in order for me to retract that, you have to admit that you don't know your own theology as well as you think you do; enough to recognize when someone posts a position word for word from a Calvinist website (Reformed at that).

re-read the post I put into the other thread yesterday.....

i very plainly stated NO one would pick on you for posting what you did as it was more in line with mainstream cal thought...I said it could be used as source material against your own posts!!!! so why not re-read what i actually said, and see that you caught nothing....you devious scheme failed even at that level...
i printed it out three times already...i will get banned if i do it again, because people are getting annoyed with your soap opera..and playing the victim,rather than repenting sincerely and moving forward.....You are a big boy...figure it out.

 

[Iconoclast]

Could you people take your petty bickering to private messaging? Or start a new thread?

Sorry....i forgot i had defiled your thread already yesterday...just did not want this to go on and on...and did not want to lose my response ...it takes me long to type it out...

 

[InTheLight]

Sorry....i forgot i had defiled your thread already yesterday...just did not want this to go on and on...and did not want to lose my response ...it takes me long to type it out...

Understood.

All right, let's get this thread back on track. So far I have asked, and have not received answers to these questions:

The Westminster Confession of Faith say that God determines people to be predestined, "so they may come most freely."? [Article X] If God determines you will come to Him, how is that "coming freely"?

If almighty God influences me, changes my heart, changes my will, how is that "free will"?

I have received definitions for free will but not a direct answer to those questions.

I have received conflicting answers to this question:

If a person has been regenerated, could they then freely choose to reject Christ? If they wanted to?

If any Calvinists want to take a shot at these questions, I'd appreciate it.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Could you people take your petty bickering to private messaging? Or start a new thread?

"Bickering", yes, "petty".....not exactly........none-the-less: It does not belong on your thread.

 

[Yeshua1]

Understood.

All right, let's get this thread back on track. So far I have asked, and have not received answers to these questions:

The Westminster Confession of Faith say that God determines people to be predestined, "so they may come most freely."? [Article X] If God determines you will come to Him, how is that "coming freely"?

If almighty God influences me, changes my heart, changes my will, how is that "free will"?

I have received definitions for free will but not a direct answer to those questions.

I have received conflicting answers to this question:

If a person has been regenerated, could they then freely choose to reject Christ? If they wanted to?

If any Calvinists want to take a shot at these questions, I'd appreciate it.

No, ALL those whom the HS regenerated will indeed receive Jesus thru faith and be saved, that confirms that their election and calling was sure, for its the Will of God that they were saved!

 

[canadyjd]

Nope, he had not believed, so he was dead in sins. He did not even know he had to believe or WHAT he had to believe. Oh yes, he was deeply convicted and knew he was lost, and he had a real desire to be saved, but he was not regenerated.

You are attempting to have it both ways.

On the one hand, you want to use Acts 16 as a proof text against the doctrine your reject, regeneration logically prior to saving faith, because scripture does not specifically say in those verses that Holy Spirit regenerated the jailer.

When I pointed out that Acts 16 doesn't specifically say Holy Spirit convicted the jailer of sin or indwelt him at salvation (doctrine you support), you responded that it doesn't have to specifically say it because those are the kind of things that Holy Spirit does.

Again, Acts 16 is not a statement of the "how" of salvation, and shouldn't be used as a proof text one way or another.

 

[canadyjd]

Recently I was told by my doctor that I needed to lose weight to control my high blood pressure. I started denying myself foods that I love, that I desire! .....Did I want to deny myself treats and snacks? No.

So tell me how my greatest desire was to quit my eating patterns developed over 50 years just so I could make numbers on an electronic box get to a level another person deemed acceptable?

You simply desired a healthier life (or desired avoiding the health consequences of high blood pressure) more than you desired the food.

 

[Iconoclast]

InTheLight

Understood.

Thanks for understanding,sorry again...

All right, let's get this thread back on track. So far I have asked, and have not received answers to these questions:

The Westminster Confession of Faith say that God determines people to be predestined, "so they may come most freely."? [Article X] If God determines you will come to Him, how is that "coming freely"?

If almighty God influences me, changes my heart, changes my will, how is that "free will"?

I understand man has a self will. Because of death in Adam....our natures are bound in sin. God in regeneration must change our heart of stone for a heart of flesh...

In psalm 110...it speaks of a people who are made willing in the day of His power.....when saving truth is able to be welcomed in the new heart, we now can begin to love God, for His great love toward us;
9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.

we are free to love and serve God....not FREE to sin and live unto self.

If a person has been regenerated, could they then freely choose to reject Christ? If they wanted to?

No....this is not what the Spirit works in believers.All sin is a grief to believers.True believers are kept by the power of God. salvation is from start to finish all of God...he is the author and finisher of our faith.
the law of God....put in the new heart....empowered by the Spirit...is a great grace to keep us seeking His face...

a healthy heart ..the new regenerate heart can pray with the psalmist here;


42 As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.

2 My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God: when shall I come and appear before God?

3 My tears have been my meat day and night, while they continually say unto me, Where is thy God?

4 When I remember these things, I pour out my soul in me: for I had gone with the multitude, I went with them to the house of God, with the voice of joy and praise, with a multitude that kept holyday.

5 Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted in me? hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise him for the help of his countenance.

6 O my God, my soul is cast down within me: therefore will I remember thee from the land of Jordan, and of the Hermonites, from the hill Mizar.

7 Deep calleth unto deep at the noise of thy waterspouts: all thy waves and thy billows are gone over me.

8 Yet the Lord will command his lovingkindness in the day time, and in the night his song shall be with me, and my prayer unto the God of my life.

9 I will say unto God my rock, Why hast thou forgotten me? why go I mourning because of the oppression of the enemy?

10 As with a sword in my bones, mine enemies reproach me; while they say daily unto me, Where is thy God?

11 Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted within me? hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise him, who is the health of my countenance, and my God.

There is a God consciousness that stays with us all the day...when we are spiritually healthy...:wavey:

 

[Winman]

You are attempting to have it both ways.

On the one hand, you want to use Acts 16 as a proof text against the doctrine your reject, regeneration logically prior to saving faith, because scripture does not specifically say in those verses that Holy Spirit regenerated the jailer.

When I pointed out that Acts 16 doesn't specifically say Holy Spirit convicted the jailer of sin or indwelt him at salvation (doctrine you support), you responded that it doesn't have to specifically say it because those are the kind of things that Holy Spirit does.

Again, Acts 16 is not a statement of the "how" of salvation, and shouldn't be used as a proof text one way or another.

Mumbo jumbo. I said the Holy Spirit caused the earthquake and the cell doors to open. That of course had a big influence on the jailer, he was going to kill himself until Paul and Silas called out to him.

It is certain he understood that Paul and Silas were men of God and that the earthquake that opened all the doors was a miracle.

But he was not regenerated, because he had not yet believed. He knew he was lost, but he didn't know what to do to be saved. He was dead in all his trespasses and sins.

You can't get around it, until you believe and your sins forgiven you are spiritually dead. It is SIN that causes spiritual death.

The natural man on his own would never KNOW how to be saved, just as the story of the Philipian jailer shows. But when God reveals the gospel to a natural man and convicts him of his sins, a natural man is enabled to believe. When he believes, his sins are forgiven and he is justified. NOW he is spritually alive and receives the Holy Spirit.

This is shown over and over in scripture.

Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Only to those who receive Jesus and believe on his name does God give the power to BECOME the sons of God.

The believing or faith ALWAYS precedes regeneration in scripture. It is shown over and over again. You cannot show even one verse that says faith precedes regeneration. ZERO.

 

[Winman]

As I understand the Calvinist concept of free will, no one truly has libertarian free will because our sin nature influences our choices such that we could never select the path of righteousness. You might say that our sin nature determines that we don't have (true) free will.

So how can the Westminster Confession of Faith say that God determines people to be predestined, "so they may come most freely."? [Article X]

I mean, if God determines you will come to Him, how is that "coming freely"?

You want to know if men have free will? Let's see what God himself says;

Lev 1:1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

Calvinists say the unsaved man cannot do good or worship God, but what did God himself say here?

How many men of the Jews could give an offering? ANY MAN OF YOU.

What kind of will did God say they have? HIS OWN VOLUNTARY WILL.

What part of HIS OWN VOLUNTARY WILL do Calvinists not understand???

Did God say this form of worship would be accepted? Yes, God said IT SHALL BE ACCEPTED FOR HIM TO MAKE AN ATONEMENT FOR HIM.

Don't listen to this falsehood Calvinism spews out, listen to the Word of God.

 

[jbh28]

Recently I was told by my doctor that I needed to lose weight to control my high blood pressure. I started denying myself foods that I love, that I desire! I would eat less at all meals. I made some difficult choices. Cut out hi-calorie snacks. Eat more fruit and vegetables. No desserts. This is not in my nature. All of my life I've been able to eat robust meals, second helpings, desserts, etc. and not get overweight.

My blood pressure was borderline, 140/90. I was 6'3" and weighed 230 lbs when I started this eating plan. I am now 205 lbs. (what I weighed in college.) My blood pressure is now 119/81, just about perfect. Have I noticed any change in the way I feel? No. Did I want to deny myself treats and snacks? No.

So tell me how my greatest desire was to quit my eating patterns developed over 50 years just so I could make numbers on an electronic box get to a level another person deemed acceptable?

First, congrats on the weight loss.

Many times, if not most of the time, we have competing desires. You had them here. You wanted to eat the hi calorie food, but you also wanted to be healthy. Which one did you choose? You choose your health. Your desire for you health outweighed your desire for your food. Did you desire the food? Of course you did, but you had a greater desire to be healthy.

this is very similar to the example I gave before of the robbery. If you are being robbed, do you really want to give the guy your money? Well, no, none of us would. But in that instance, you want to live more than you want your money, so you give the money. Same thing with your eating. You wanted to be healthy more than you wanted that food. That desire outweighed your other desire. That's why you choose that. No one made you choose you. you choose the healthy choices because you wanted to. That was also your desire and it was more than the other.

 

[canadyjd]

The Westminster Confession of Faith say that God determines people to be predestined, "so they may come most freely."? [Article X] If God determines you will come to Him, how is that "coming freely"?

If almighty God influences me, changes my heart, changes my will, how is that "free will"?

First of all, Article X didn't use the phrase "free will", it says "they may come most freely."

I believe the entire concept of "free will" is a lie straight from the mouth of Satan. In the garden, when Satan tempted Eve to eat of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil he claimed she would become "like God, knowing good and evil". I believe that in that phrase is the assumption she would no longer need God to choose good over evil, but that she could use her own will to make the choice for good every time, just "like God". It was a lie then, and it is a lie today.

If a person has been regenerated, could they then freely choose to reject Christ? If they wanted to?

I have already answered this directly. No. Regeneration doesn't put a person in a "neutral" position with respect to making a decision about Christ... regeneration allows a person to see and understand the truth of their own sinfulness and their alienation from God, and see and understand the truth that Christ died for their sins and that coming to Christ in faith will heal that sinfulness and alienation. No person so worked upon by Holy Spirit will reject the offer of salvation.

Generally, people make a "decision" by weighing the options and attempting to decide which is the best according to their desires. There are all sorts of influences going on in a person's mind, so the "will" is never "free" from those influences, which include their own sinful natures, the pressure and expectations of family, friends, co-workers and others, the known results of others who have made those decisions, and routines or habits as well. Satan and his demons (in some cases anyway) also influence a person's will.

So, the very concept of "free-will" is flawed from the beginning. There is never a time in a person's life when the "will" is not being influenced outside and inside by all sorts of things, nor can there be. There is never a time when the will is set to "neutral", when a person can view all the variables without any influence whatsoever, and be "just like God" in making the decision; it is much too late for that.

Whether you acknowledge the work of Holy Spirit in regeneration or simply agree that Holy Spirit convicts a person of sin, the truth is that God must intervene in a person's life for salvation to occur.

 

[Winman]

I believe the entire concept of "free will" is a lie straight from the mouth of Satan.

Really?

Lev 1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.

God himself speaks of man's OWN VOLUNTARY WILL and you say the concept is a lie straight from the mouth of Satan?

That is close to blasphemy. You are attributing the words of God to Satan.

 

[canadyjd]

Really?

Lev 1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.

God himself speaks of man's OWN VOLUNTARY WILL and you say the concept is a lie straight from the mouth of Satan?

That is close to blasphemy. You are attributing the words of God to Satan.

No, I am not.

NAS Lev.1:3 "If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer it, a male without defect; he shall offer it at the doorway of the tent of meeting that he may be accepted before the LORD."

NAS doesn't have the phrase you highlighted. I'd have to do a study of the Hebrew to determine if "his own voluntary will" is actually in the text. I doubt it, since NAS is a more literal translation than others...most of the time.

But even if it is, the phrase "his own voluntary will" is not the same as the phrase "free-will" that we are using in our modern day debate, 3500 years later.

I readily acknowledge the obvious, people have human will which they exercise in accordance with their desires.

 

[Winman]

No, I am not.

NAS Lev.1:3 "If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer it, a male without defect; he shall offer it at the doorway of the tent of meeting that he may be accepted before the LORD."

NAS doesn't have the phrase you highlighted. I'd have to do a study of the Hebrew to determine if "his own voluntary will" is actually in the text. I doubt it, since NAS is a more literal translation than others...most of the time.

But even if it is, the phrase "his own voluntary will" is not the same as the phrase "free-will" that we are using in our modern day debate, 3500 years later.

I readily acknowledge the obvious, people have human will which they exercise in accordance with their desires.

What?? I thought the King James and the Modern Versions all said the same thing? What is going on here? Are you telling me the version you read says something completely different from the King James?

Who'd of thunk?

Here's what various versions say;

KJV
If his offering [be] a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
© Info

NKJV
'If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD.
© Info

NLT
"If the animal you present as a burnt offering is from the herd, it must be a male with no defects. Bring it to the entrance of the Tabernacle so you* may be accepted by the LORD.
Footnote:
* Or it.
© Info

NIV
“ ‘If the offering is a burnt offering from the herd, you are to offer a male without defect. You must present it at the entrance to the tent of meeting so that it will be acceptable to the LORD.
© Info

ESV
"If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without blemish. He shall bring it to the entrance of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD.
© Info

RVR
Si su ofrenda fuere holocausto vacuno, macho sin defecto lo ofrecerá; de su voluntad lo ofrecerá a la puerta del tabernáculo de reunión delante de Jehová.
© Info

NASB
'If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer it, a male without defect; he shall offer it at the doorway of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD.
© Info

RSV
"If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD;
© Info

ASV
If his oblation be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall offer it a male without blemish: he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before Jehovah.
© Info

YLT
`If his offering [is] a burnt-offering out of the herd -- a male, a perfect one, he doth bring near, unto the opening of the tent of meeting he doth bring it near, at his pleasure, before Jehovah;
© Info

DBY
If his offering be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall present it a male without blemish: at the entrance of the tent of meeting shall he present it, for his acceptance before Jehovah.
© Info

WEB
If his offering shall [be] a burnt-sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
© Info

HNV
"'If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without blemish. He shall offer it at the door of the Tent of Meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD.


Wow, I am shocked, many of the Modern Versions do not say the same thing as the King James Bible.

NOT!

 

[canadyjd]

What?? I thought the King James and the Modern Versions all said the same thing? What is going on here? Are you telling me the version you read says something completely different from the King James?

Who'd of thunk?......

Wow, I am shocked, many of the Modern Versions do not say the same thing as the King James Bible.

NOT!

As guess I'd like to know what the original Hebrew says.

Anyway, if it does say "his voluntary will", do you believe that phrase is the same thing we are talking about when we discuss "free-will"?

 

[Winman]

As guess I'd like to know what the original Hebrew says.

Anyway, if it does say "his voluntary will", do you believe that phrase is the same thing we are talking about when we discuss "free-will"?

I am no scholar, just a simple fella, but I cannot think of "his own voluntary will' meaning anything but FREE WILL.

To me that means that any man can choose God, or choose against God.

I don't get into all these philosophical arguments, that is nothing but smoke. Either a man can choose for or against God or he can't. Scripture says he can.

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Cain is significant, because we know from the NT that he was lost. Yet God implied he could choose to offer an acceptable sacrifice or refuse to offer an acceptale sacrifice. Cain had free will according to God himself.

This scripture also refutes Unconditional Election, because God said Cain could have been accepted with him, based on a condition.

Total Inability is an absolutely false doctrine easily refuted by MUCH scripture.

 

[canadyjd]

I am no scholar, just a simple fella, but I cannot think of "his own voluntary will' meaning anything but FREE WILL.

To me that means that any man can choose God, or choose against God.

The passage you quoted concerns bringing a goat to be sacrificed at the temple. It has nothing to do with our modern day notion of "free-will".

I don't get into all these philosophical arguments, that is nothing but smoke. Either a man can choose for or against God or he can't. Scripture says he can......This scripture also refutes Unconditional Election, because God said Cain could have been accepted with him, based on a condition.

Total Inability is an absolutely false doctrine easily refuted by MUCH scripture.

For a man claiming to be just a simple fella, not a scholar or a philosopher, you seem to have no problem with declaring others are following "false doctrine".

 

[Winman]

The passage you quoted concerns bringing a goat to be sacrificed at the temple. It has nothing to do with our modern day notion of "free-will".

It was real worship, God said the offering would be accepted an an ATONEMENT for them. It was an act of worship that God himself said he would accept.

Calvinism says the unsaved man cannot do anything that pleases God. According to Calvinism, a man would have to be regenerated before he was able to present an offering that would be accepted for an atonement for him.

Does that sound just a little contradictory and confusing???

For a man claiming to be just a simple fella, not a scholar or a philosopher, you seem to have no problem with declaring others are following "false doctrine".

Scripture is not that complicated, Paul said that Timothy had known the scriptures from a child that were ABLE to MAKE him WISE unto SALVATION.

2 Tim 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

A child can understand the word of God and be made wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ,

It is man-made philosophies like Calvinism that are complicated and difficult to understand. Especially because MUCH of it is nothing but pure DOUBLE-TALK.

 

[Iconoclast]

The passage you quoted concerns bringing a goat to be sacrificed at the temple. It has nothing to do with our modern day notion of "free-will".
For a man claiming to be just a simple fella, not a scholar or a philosopher, you seem to have no problem with declaring others are following "false doctrine".

The verse means it was not required under the law. They could offer voluntarily. It is not addressing the issue of the false idea of free will which does not exist.