Calvinists please help me as I am trying to understand.

[zrs6v4]

Just a note - It would only be universalism if all were saved.

I know. My view is that all God calls for salvation will be saved (the regenerate calling if you will). Your view is that there is one type of realization in which we can accept or reject. The equal realization I'd name it. I realize I may misunderstand you by the way. Like I said I see two types of revelation and one true calling. I know Jesus says He will call all to Himself, but it is contradictory to His previous statements the Father gives/chooses, and draws and nobody can come unless given by the Father. Also see John 6:63-65/10:16. We know that God cannot contrdict His own Word, so There must be a misunderstanding on one of our parts... Jesus said He only gets who is drawn by the Father and then He says He draws all people. Jesus cannot draw all people and only get a few at the same time. This is why I said John 12:32 must be talking about the judgment when all will be before God. I am unclear at this point, which could be a paradox I guess

IF God did it this way who are we to argue? The point is we know very little about that event. The only thing we actaully know is that we are chosen by God and it was His decision alone. We can state that it appears a few passages of scripture give allusions or inferences that indicate 'faith' might have been involved in some way or measure but even then it is not exactly specific. (that is we can see this depending on how we see the verse or understand what the verse is saying).

If we are chosen by God and it was His decision alone, then how then does our belief matter? Yes we believed and all of that but it was meant to happen and willed. Therefore we were predestined to believe. This doesnt take away from responsibility but it gives a hint of God's power. It just seems contradictory (maybe paradoxical) to say that God chose us and still gave us the choice to reject His choice (which never is altered), this would be two wills colliding or ours determining Gods. It does make sense to say that our choices of good are based on Gods Will namely our belief. Unless God has infinite wills that are constantly changing according to who believes, which isn't biblical and not my view.

Then it seems like you are not telling the full truth as you know it. Like you are trying to hide something from them that will keep them away if they knew it.
You are telling them they have a choice but in truth you don't believe they do.
If God wills them to be saved then no matter what you tell them they will.

No I believe they do have a choice, but in my heart I know there choice doesnt matter if they are not in the flock of sheep that Christ is going to save. So for all I know they could be or could not be. I cant say what I would say anyways to be honest, but it is dependant on the Holy Spirit's guidence. I for example made a bunch of choices in my life toward godly things and it would have hurt me to have predestination on my mind while listening to my heart on obeying God. It is like teaching calculus to a 10 year old. It may not be suitable at the present time.
We do have a choice but the choice is never gonna be made without God making the choice possible with His full work in us. therefore we cannot choose God unless chosen first. Not all are chosen like this. when we are chosen we will respond to God's plan even if unaware.

While I agree that man can not do any righteous or salvic (saving) acts/work.
And scripture also states that we are not indwelt by the Holy Spirit but 'by faith' so if there is no indwelling to after one excersizes faith then what are you meaning "in Spirit".
Scripture states that belief is 'counted' for righteousness. But again we only are righteous 'by faith'.

God revealing and converting us by his metaphorical hand being on our hearts giving guidance and proper decisions in order with what He has in mind for us and our lives. Abraham experienced this and God's hand was on His heart to Genesis 15 when He believed. The same is with us. My argument is when God actually puts His hand on ones heart like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Isaiah, then it is a work being done every time. We are making decisions but being driven by God. When He lets go we drive all over the place and crash. This is why I cant see someone rejecting and crashing when God is truly working on their hearts. This would be God giving up on them also and saying your to hard of a work for me to save. When I know that God could send everyone angels daily making sure they chose Him if He so wanted. It just doesnt happen because thats not the plan.

On this I can agree as I have friends who illistrate this point. But, just to be argumentive , what do we then say about those are the same as above but are not Calvinists? Is it then Calvinism or their love for Christ and His love?

I just wanted to say I dont want to be a Calvanist, :tongue3:, but I do want to rightly understand God and continue in Love of Christ. I would say love is the more important thing and drives us in every way.
I do think Christ does teach us in the Word that this love is much greater than we know and the more we understand it the more it increases all aspects of our life in Christ. I think that between Christ dieing for us and us not doing a thing to earn it is a good start of being in a state of reverant fear.
I do want to say Isaiah's (6:1-7) encounter is a great example of revelation by the way. And he didnt just stand there and say Im a sinner, crap, are we cool now God..... I dont believe everyone gets that kind of revelation.

 

[Allan]

I would say first off God's will is doing anything He pleases, basically. I would have to just throw a basic answer out saying those that hear the truth and see it, but dont understand are a great example of how we cant accept it without God the Holy Spirit. Its not Him allowing them to not recieve but them not receiving b/c they cant without Him.

Of course God can do anything He pleases but everything that God does has a purpose. Again you statement of them 'not understanding' can not be supported by scripture as far as I have found. It is an assumption (meaning not specifically in scripture). When scripture speaks about the natural man not able to understand spiritual things it is speaking specifically about the natural man himself trying to understand it, NOT when God gives it to them. Paul is speaking of two distinct groups in the way 'they live'. The natural man can not 'of himself' understand any spiritual truth so when scripture says that God reveals it to them so that they 'know' (Rom 1) and are without excuse, then we must conclude they do in fact know and thus understand. They understand because God made them to know and not that through natural man they aquired this knowledge.

I still remain firm in Romans on how we cant make godly decisions against our nature unless God is behind it. Mans responsibility is 100%, but like I said we are in that helpless state of dependancy on God.

I nor any other non-cal or even Arminian would disagree with you on this point.

You sound like you are agreeing with both views (which I understand and feel the same way sometimes)

Because the truth is scripture says both It is sometimes called scriptural tensions and both sides of the issue acknowledge them. (except of course those who either lean or are Hyper in their views)

Eph. 1:1-11, so if God before time wills for some to be saved then His will will be done. Anything is possible for God, but how can God predestine for all of it to happen and yet today and tomorrow be giving choices.

This depends greatly on what you understand (pre)destining to actually be.
To destine means that it is determined to happen. Not 'how' it was determined but simply that it was/is to happen. Anything more than that is adding to it.
(Rant coming ) ) To postulate dogmatically (as some do) that God's determining was made outside His knowledge of all things borders on the absurd. Why? Because to be dogmatic in this thought without ANY scriptural evidence is unbiblical and making ones theology their authority and not scripture.

Like I said when one rejects that would seem to be against His will if they were of His Will, which they rightly could according to your view. IOW- you are saying God predestines some which in deep, no choice, while others HE doesnt, which means again no choice. IF they did have a choice then the Will of God would be determinant on their choice.

You lost me here. Here is a fact we should agree on. If God says there is a choice then how can we say there isn't one? God predestination includes choice, not as reason for something but the means to it. God knows full well what He intends and knows full well what any and every man will do. In God's view He sees the end result so choices are not why something happens but what God used to bring something about. For you it is a choice and to God it is a valid open choice, BUT God knows full well what you will do. The fact God knows what you will choose does not change the fact it was a choice with two actaul and possible outcomes. It simply means that God knew and used choice to bring it into being. Man fully responsible and God predetermining the outcome even in the midst of mans will.

yes they were condemned for not believing the truth(we all were there at one point). It never said God revealed anything to them, but rather God sends them a strong dilusion, so they may believe what is false in order that they may be condemned who did not believe the truth but have pleasure in unrighteousness.

Yes, the passage does say that God revealed something to them. Spiritual truth can not be aquired by man of himself. God has to reveal it to him and we know that the scripture says it was specifically the gospel truth because it says "that they might be saved". God ONLY sent a strong delusion to them AFTER they rejected the truth that could save them. Notice it states FOR THIS CAUSE (not yelling just using it to elaborate) God sent them a strong delusion. What happened that God would judge them so harshly and harden their hearts? They rejected the truth He revealed to them that they might be saved. Notice they were damned/condemned after rejecting the truth brother, and not before.

God isnt saying that all of these are getting a shot, but rather that all are condemned.

Really? They rejected the truth that they might be saved and for that reason God sent a strong delusion to be a lie that they might be condemned who believed not the truth. Twice it states they are condemned for not believing the truth and so be saved. I don't know how you can say they didn't get a shot when it plainly says they did.

Those who claim to see remain blind and those who claim to be blind may see.

Now what you just quoted here I would request you go back and examine that passage. Jesus said this and it is specific regarding sin. The pharisees knew the truth and rejected it thus their sins remained because they did see/know but did not believe. For more elaboration Nick in John 3 states that 'they know' (those in authority of whom he was one) he was sent from God. But at the time Jesus made this statement they were accusing him of everything but being sent from God.

They can reject the general calling most have (the part where they see and hear) but the special calling is a divine Will

This is another 'logical' conclusion derived for a theological construct and not 'so much' scripture. You will not find scripture saying there are two types of calling, ever. It is seen (and I understand why they say this) in scirpture that we as believers are called and we are also refered to as the called. Thus I understand why they assume there is two callings.

I said this earlier in the thread:

Oh yes, but the 'called' there is speaking of the means by which God drew those whom He foreknew. To assume this is speaking of God calling only the elect is going beyond the plain reading of the text and imposing your theology upon the wording.

Otherwise we must declare Jesus a liar who said that many are called but few chosen. And if you will study the parable you will find the many are the two groups called seperately but not called differently. That being the Jews were called by God and since they 'rejected' it, the Gentiles were called. There is no special selecting in the calling there but a definate and real invitation to all men to come and partake.

An illistration of what I mean:
I can send out invitations to 100 people to be my guests. Now all are called and called in the same way, but only those who come are called my guests, yet when refering to the means by which they came are they not 'the called'?

 

[Allan]

I know Jesus says He will call all to Himself, but it is contradictory to His previous statements the Father gives/chooses, and draws and nobody can come unless given by the Father. Also see John 6:63-65/10:16.

Actually, no it isn't as far as I can see. You must first remember that Israel, God's chosen people, was under judgment for sin and unbelief and thus God had blinded them as a nation. Thus for any Jew (to whom Jesus came first) who came to Christ was in fact because the Father called them specifically - I'll explain this a bit more in a second. Scripture through Jesus tells us that they were already the Fathers and He gave them to the Son (John 17:6). We also see in John 17:6, 11, 12 that those whom the Father gave Jesus did indeed come and Jesus says so. Jesus also states there were other to come as well who will do so through their words John 17:20 - thus the prayer of Christ encompasses all believers but is also specifically for them there.

Now let us also understand that many of those who heard at that point most likely were said latter on since we know that thousands of Jews were saved after Christ's resurrection through the preaching of the gospel. So the fact of what Jesus was saying i John 6 is not that the Father only draws some but that unless the Father is drawing you you can not come to Christ. Man of and by himself can not know any spiritual truths nor will they seek them. God must first act so that man might know anything that is spiritual.

As a side note to the above - Remember that Jesus was speaking to the Jews here in John 6 and of them (specifically those who would not believe) Jesus said He was the bread of Heaven given to/for 'them' -John 6:32. Moses nor God selectively gave the manna to the people but was for all who wanted it and received it unto themselves. Jesus said the Father is doing the same thing with Him. Which is the same message He state to Nick in John 3 about the serpent being lifted up so must the Son of Man be.

If we are chosen by God and it was His decision alone, then how then does our belief matter?

It matters only if He wanted it to. Man has no say in his election, in the sense that man does not give his input in how it aught to be nor does man advise God. God decides and how He determines whom He will save is God's decision.

Yes we believed and all of that but it was meant to happen and willed. Therefore we were predestined to believe. This doesnt take away from responsibility but it gives a hint of God's power.

Agreed.

It just seems contradictory (maybe paradoxical) to say that God chose us and still gave us the choice to reject His choice (which never is altered), this would be two wills colliding or ours determining Gods.

But your assuming choice alters something. If one holds that God doesn't know all things then your argument would hold better.

No I believe they do have a choice, but in my heart I know there choice doesnt matter if they are not in the flock of sheep that Christ is going to save.

But that is just it. Their choice does in fact matter and it does not change the truth of God's decree.

So for all I know they could be or could not be. I cant say what I would say anyways to be honest, but it is dependant on the Holy Spirit's guidence. I for example made a bunch of choices in my life toward godly things and it would have hurt me to have predestination on my mind while listening to my heart on obeying God. It is like teaching calculus to a 10 year old. It may not be suitable at the present time.

Says who If God wanted a 10 year old to know would it hurt him?

God revealing and converting us by his metaphorical hand being on our hearts giving guidance and proper decisions in order with what He has in mind for us and our lives. Abraham experienced this and God's hand was on His heart to Genesis 15 when He believed. The same is with us. My argument is when God actually puts His hand on ones heart like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Isaiah, then it is a work being done every time. We are making decisions but being driven by God. When He lets go we drive all over the place and crash. This is why I cant see someone rejecting and crashing when God is truly working on their hearts. This would be God giving up on them also and saying your to hard of a work for me to save. When I know that God could send everyone angels daily making sure they chose Him if He so wanted. It just doesnt happen because thats not the plan.

But this is your understanding of it and it is based on certain things that need to be in order to come to your conclusions. I don't see some of the things in scripture but more coming from a system in which to view the bible, so my view had to change to conform to what I saw in scripture. I'm not saying I'm right and their wrong. I'm saying I have to be true to that which God has revealed to me and if it change.. so be it.. if not then I can do nothing but declare that which I have both seen and heard.

I just wanted to say I dont want to be a Calvanist, :tongue3:,

I agree, I have labels too. They rarely accurately depict what one believes. And the only time it does is when that person self proclaims the title (and even then they might be wrong)

I do want to say Isaiah's (6:1-7) encounter is a great example of revelation by the way. And he didnt just stand there and say Im a sinner, crap, are we cool now God..... I dont believe everyone gets that kind of revelation.

But remember, Isaiah was already a believer and was in fact a prophet of God already as well.

 

[zrs6v4]

Allan,

I havent gone back to comment on your responses, but I was thinking about this today and I wanted to ask you a question concerning your way of seeing things as of right now..

Do you believe that everyone has an opportunity to become a believer (accept/reject) in Christ and be saved from God's perspective? Or do you believe that God reveals the gospel to some people, who have a choice to reject or accept? or whatever simple statment you'd like to make to refresh my memory..

I think I can sum all of this up to 2 "major" differences in our perspective of what God is saying through the Word, which is ok with me. I, as you were saying am also willing to go wherever God/Scripture leads with the clear facts. I dont want to come across stubborn or as if I have shut the door to scripture but

1- I, as of right now, cannot see anyone rejecting God's calling.
2- I , as of right now, only see God calling the elect.
--therefore all whom God calls, while having a choice, never reject.

 

[zrs6v4]

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12

"The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Im starting from scratch as if I never have heard this before..... hah...

this is talking about the anti-Christ, and how he is being restrained by the Holy Spirit.

v10 he deceives those who are unbelieving b/c they refused the truth.
v11 God sends them a delusion (false belief) so that they may believe what is false.
v12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness

Yes all these who are condemned did not believe the truth and were not saved. If they would have accepted then they would have been saved. but why didnt they accept? this doesnt seem to answer any deeper.

This doesnt tell me God called them to himself and I still see two types of revelations to people (yes they knew the same truth (#1type), but (#2 type) they were not given to understand and believe Matt. 13:13-16). They both got the same gospel truth but God reveals it to the depths of understanding to some so they will turn. So what Im saying is they got the truth just like the Pharisees and Jewish leaders did (#1type). They did not get it like the disciples did #2(type). IOW- there are two people in church hearing the same message but one gets it and uses it while the other doesnt get it at all. It is a spiritual/heart discernment of the same truth revealed in 2 types of ways. I know we go round and round, hah

 

[Rippon]

What I said seems to have brought some confusion but I was just giving you a heads up for future reference that some people will be nit-picky about what you type knowing full well you actually mean but like to try to twist what you say. For an example just look at Rippons responces {sic}to me.

I haven't even posted anything since the 4th of Feb. your time.I have not been "nit-picky" about what you have said.Your theological points are really disturbing.When I challenge or question a view of yours I actually mean it.There is no twisting,bending, folding or mutilating in my replies to you.

Please try to show more class.It doesn't speak well of your office.

 

[zrs6v4]

ALLAN-

on this question I posted above "Do you believe that everyone has an opportunity to become a believer (accept/reject) in Christ and be saved from God's perspective? "

I do mean that anyone who hears and accepts will be saved, but what Im trying to get across is, is it possible for everyone to accept? or is God working on everyone equally?

 

[Tom Butler]

Allan can speak for himself, but many non-Cals believe that somehow, someway, everyone has had an opportunity to be saved. Even if they've never heard the gospel, they have received some measure of light. And most rejected the light that they had.

This is an article of faith. Here's the reasoning. Jesus died on the cross for everyone without exception. To deny them the opportunity to accept or reject Christ would not be, well, um, fair. It would favoritism. Why, it would be, uh, Calvinistic.

This would apply to the guy in Athens who died five minutes before Paul arrived in town with the gospel.

I don't want to misrepresent this view, so maybe somebody who holds this view can drop in and explain it further.

 

[Allan]

Allan can speak for himself, but many non-Cals believe that somehow, someway, everyone has had an opportunity to be saved. Even if they've never heard the gospel, they have received some measure of light. And most rejected the light that they had.

This is an article of faith. Here's the reasoning. Jesus died on the cross for everyone without exception. To deny them the opportunity to accept or reject Christ would not be, well, um, fair. It would favoritism. Why, it would be, uh, Calvinistic.

This would apply to the guy in Athens who died five minutes before Paul arrived in town with the gospel.

I don't want to misrepresent this view, so maybe somebody who holds this view can drop in and explain it further.

Well.. you did brother

The reasoning has nothing to do with being fair. If God were fair all would be in hell. The reasoning has to do with what scripture says.
Christ is light that enlightens all men that come into the world.
Christ said that He will draw all men unto Himself
Christ said that the Holy Spirit will come and covict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment to come.
Christ said that many are called but few are chosen. (this parable shows all men everywhere being called)
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Paul states that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth.
God commands all men everywhere to repent. Yet repentance is toward or for salvation.
and many, many more that I can continue to list.

The list can go on and it is not the passage alone (proof-texting) that says it but the context bears out the fact that God indeed does desire all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth. No man can know any spiritual truth unless God reveal it to and according to scripture He does this that they might be saved. (1 John 2:2) Not that they all will nor that He has decreed they all will. But the 'offer' of salvation is honestly and potentially toward all men though only His chosen will respond in faith.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.

His propitation was made for all men (1 John 2:2) but is applied only to the elect because it is only applied through faith. (Rom 3:25)

 

[Tom Butler]

Well.. you did brother

The reasoning has nothing to do with being fair. If God were fair all would be in hell. The reasoning has to do with what scripture says.
Christ is light that enlightens all men that come into the world.
Christ said that He will draw all men unto Himself
Christ said that the Holy Spirit will come and covict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment to come.
Christ said that many are called but few are chosen. (this parable shows all men everywhere being called)
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Paul states that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth.
God commands all men everywhere to repent. Yet repentance is toward or for salvation.
and many, many more that I can continue to list.

The list can go on and on and it is not the passage alone that says it but the context bears out the fact that indeed does desire all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth. No man can know any spiritual truth unless God reveal it to and according to scripture He does this that they might be saved. (1 John 2:2) Not that they all will nor that He has decreed they all will. But the 'offer' of salvation is honestly and potentially toward all men though only His chosen will respond in faith.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.

His propitation was made for all men (1 John 2:2) but is applied only to the elect because it is only applied through faith. (Rom 3:25)

When I used the term "fair" I should have made it clear that it was sort of tongue-in-cheek. We both agree that God doesn't have to be fair. And we ought to be glad that he is not.

Beyond that, the difference between what I articulated as a non-Calvinist view, and your view? It appears that they are the same. Other than the 'fair" thing, where else did I mis-represent?

 

[Allan]

ALLAN-

on this question I posted above "Do you believe that everyone has an opportunity to become a believer (accept/reject) in Christ and be saved from God's perspective? "

I do mean that anyone who hears and accepts will be saved, but what Im trying to get across is, is it possible for everyone to accept? or is God working on everyone equally?

Is it 'possible' for every to accept? Yes, but only in the sense the choice is a very real choice. It is also called an 'offer' most times rather than choice but it is eccentially the same. God does indeed make a real and valid offer of salvation to all men everywhere, and even many Calvinists/Reformers/Presby's agree.

Some Cals disagree not so much on the declaration of the gospel message going out to any and all but on the fact that God is giving an actual offer. However it is a divided issue even amongst them. Thus it gives credence that this issue isn't so cut and dried as some think.

Will all believe is the real question, and the answer is "no".

 

[Allan]

When I used the term "fair" I should have made it clear that it was sort of tongue-in-cheek. We both agree that God doesn't have to be fair. And we ought to be glad that he is not.

Beyond that, the difference between what I articulated as a non-Calvinist view, and your view? It appears that they are the same. Other than the 'fair" thing, where else did I mis-represent?

Your premise was built upon 'fair' as if that was the reasoning behind God giving all men truth. Thus your example of the Athenian who died 5 minutes before Pauls arrival.

The first portion you are correct in that God gives all men some measure of truth.
Romans 1 and 2 bears this out plainly and bring in along side John 1 which states that Christ is the light that enlightens (gives light) to all men that come into the world, as well as the Spirit being sent forth to convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment to come.

I know you were not 'intentionally' trying to mis-rep but being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, which is why I placed the smiley at the end. I don't use them unless I mean I to was being funny.

 

[Allan]

Im starting from scratch as if I never have heard this before..... hah...
-snip-
Yes all these who are condemned did not believe the truth and were not saved. If they would have accepted then they would have been saved. but why didnt they accept? this doesnt seem to answer any deeper.

I'm glad that you at least agree they 'potentially' could be saved if they believed. Thus they had a choice.
However can I say that I think it does answer deeper.
They did not 'receive' the truth so as to be saved, and in verse 12 it states the reason they did not want to, they had pleasure in unrighteousness. Just as it speaks in Romans 1 of them trading the truth for a lie. They chose pleasure/self over the truth. Just as scripture says the opposite of those who choose truth over self.

This doesnt tell me God called them to himself and I still see two types of revelations to people (yes they knew the same truth (#1type), but (#2 type) they were not given to understand and believe Matt. 13:13-16).

First, brother the Matt 13 passage is specifcally and only talking about Israel and Jesus even affirms this in stating "this people". It was part of the Judgment God has send upon Israel that Isaiah prophesied would happen to Israel.

Secondly, you keep saying 'understand' as if those whom God has revealed His truths to do not understand what He has revealed. The very definition of 'reveal' is the make 'known' (understood) that which was not previously. Unless I am missing something I would humbly ask for some scripture that says in more specific terms or illistration that they do not understand what God reveals to them.

As I said previously, the term 'understand' is actaully a neutral word in and of itself. However in relation to scripture to understand corrisponds to one who works/obeys in conjunction with the revealed truth and the fool is the one who opposes it. Thus understanding is used in scripture to describe one who has obeyed, not that it regards their comprehension.

They both got the same gospel truth but God reveals it to the depths of understanding to some so they will turn.

Can you provide scripture that speaks to God revealing to some just not so much that they can would understand it?

Question on the above: What is the purpose then of God revealing anything to those not chosen if He doesn't want them to believe?

So what Im saying is they got the truth just like the Pharisees and Jewish leaders did (#1type). They did not get it like the disciples did #2(type). IOW- there are two people in church hearing the same message but one gets it and uses it while the other doesnt get it at all. It is a spiritual/heart discernment of the same truth revealed in 2 types of ways. I know we go round and round, hah

The answer I believe here is much simpler and then again not so much simpler.
We know the natural man apart from God's revelation can not know anything that is spiritual truth. However when God does move upon a person (and that encompasses all men) and reveals truths God Himself is enabling them to accept or reject His revealed truths.

 

[zrs6v4]

Alan we are going in circles, haha, To be continued in the future. Sorry I waited so long for the reply, I have been busy. Im going to start a new thread please feel free to jump in

 

[quickened1]

I have a question. Does the Calvanist believe that regeneration takes place in eternity past ?

 

[Allan]

I have a question. Does the Calvanist believe that regeneration takes place in eternity past ?

Not in any of their works that I have ever read or even heard of regarding the mainline theology. There are some that would be classified as hypers that might believe that but that is not to be confused with mainline Calvinism/sovereign grace doctrines

 

[Tom Butler]

I have a question. Does the Calvanist believe that regeneration takes place in eternity past ?

It takes place in time. But, in the mind of God all future events are already accomplished.

That's why John said Jesus was "slain from the foundation of the world.

 

[quickened1]

Ok Im trying to see it through the eyes of a Calvanist. God elects some to salvation before the foundation of the world. Those who aren't elected are lost and cannot be saved. The elect do not know who they are until The Lord calls them. At this point he regenrates them which gives them the faith to believe. Since they were already saved before the foundation of the world, they don't state that they were saved upon regenration they were just simply brought to faith at that moment. Is this correct ?

 

[Tom Butler]

Ok Im trying to see it through the eyes of a Calvanist. God elects some to salvation before the foundation of the world. Those who aren't elected are lost and cannot be saved. The elect do not know who they are until The Lord calls them. At this point he regenrates them which gives them the faith to believe. Since they were already saved before the foundation of the world, they don't state that they were saved upon regenration they were just simply brought to faith at that moment. Is this correct ?

Yes and no.

Election is from eternity past. God is immutable, so what he intends today he has always intended. There was never a time when he came to a point and said to himself, "okay, I think I'll elect quickened1.

Your next sentence is a huge point of contention. Most Calvinists will characterize sinful humanity as all lost and destined for hell. God, in his mercy, saves some, while others are simply left for their deserved punishment.

Most Non-Cals wiould call this double predestination--that is, God elects some to salvation, and others to hell.

Your third point is an accurate description of Calvinist thought. Only when one has been saved does he then understand that he is one of God's elect.

And Calvinists do believe regeneration precedes salvation; and God gives the gift of repentance and faith. Then they are able to freely trust in Christ for salvation.

Watch some tricky semantics in the term "saved before the foundation of the world."
There is a sense in which this is true, since all future events are already accomplished in the mind of God. But in another sense, at least from the human perspective, we were saved in time. It is at some point in time that the Holy Spirit does his regenerating, illuminating, convicting and calling on us, and grants us repentance and faith.

Non-Calvinists may agree that election is eternal, but for a different reason. They will say that God's election is based on foreseen faith--that God knows who will repent and trust Christ for salvation, and elects them on that basis. They also hold that regeneration and salvation are the same thing. They hold that faith precedes regeneration, not the other way around.

Calvinists maintain that being dead in sin also means spiritual inability. Only by a work of the Holy Spirit is one able to have the ability to freely repent and trust Christ. Non-Calvinists hold that human beings are not totally without ability--that each person has been given the power to exercise free will in the matter of salvation.

I have tried to accurately portray both sides. If I have misrepresented the non-Cal position, be assured that it won't go unchallenged.

 

[quickened1]

Ok Tom I really appreciate your post. It cleared up things in a few areas.