Can a Calvinist know for sure?

So although this is key to what you say they believe - they will not actually "say it"??

You seem pretty certain that they are not actually "saying it".

On that part - you and I agree.

Do they "Actually say" that "The death of Christ has no effect unless one accepts Him"??

Do you have a quote?

It would be "easy" for any opposing view to "ignore" what the other view is actually saying simply give their own negative "summations" or "judgments" as though that is the view actually held by the opposition.

But it is hard to engage in an objective dialoge when they do that.

The point of the thread was to take a more objective view based on what the models "actually say".

Arminians "actually say" they have a claim to "assurance" because they actually go through the steps listed in Romans 10.

If you really object to the Romans 10 model Paul defines -- that is ok. But it is not a logical way to argue that Arminians have no basis for their claims of assurance.

Using that "actual" logic in the Arminian position you CAN argue that they have a challenge (or maybe even a contradiction) claiming OSAS.

But that is about it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I assume you are talking about those who will be saved. The saints. Those that CHRIST calls the "FEW" of Matt 7??

Can you confirm?

If you are a 3 or 5 point Calvinist - is this not the very "Assurance" you will claim is "retro-deleted" (as in never existed no matter how much one protests and claims that it really did exist) if you should fail to persevere 10 years from today??

(Which I think is the whole pointed question of this thread is it not?)

In Christ,

Bob

 

That could possibly be true if that person was an Arminian claiming that they doubted today's salvation based on what might happen 10 years from today.

But if it were a 3 or 5 Point Calvinist that believes in retro-deleting assurance - then they are just being "consistent" and therefore honest.

In Christ,

Bob

 

BTW when do you respond to Paul's statement in 1Cor 11??

Is this your claim about 1Cor 11?

Or do you not have a way to fit your view in with that yet?

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is certainly good to find something we can agree on.

Do you see Paul doing that in 1Cor 11? In 2Cor 13:5 he says we are to test ourselves to see IF we are in the faith. But in 1Cor 11 he speaks of his own situation and the need to "Buffet my body and make it my slave LEST after preaching the gospel to others I myself should be disqualified"

Very true.

Fortunately God sends the Holy Spirit of "truth" to "Convict the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16.

Indeed. In fact that "TULIP" is not an Arminian invention at all.

They argue for Perseverance (and rightly so). But in doing so they claim that anyone who fails to persevere 10 years from today - has all their assurance "retro deleted" as in "it never existed in the first place".

This is the view of Spurgeon, John MacArthur Calvin and others.

They argue that God is sovereign to choose you, to save you and to cause you to persevere just as His Words says the saints must do.

So when it turns out that you don't persevere 10 years from today - it is proof to them that you were never saved to start with.

Well they claim that since you don't do anything to get saved and since salvation is all of God and none-of-you perseverance is merely optional. If you fail to persevere then you are not has happy etc - but it has nothing at all to do with your salvation.

This means that whatever assurance you think you have today is not impacted at all by the fact that you fail to persevere 10 years from today. In that view.

So it is good for both OSAS and for assurance.

AT the cost of rejecting the Bible teaching on Perseverance.

The model itself allows for assurance because it does not forbid the Romans 10 sequence for salvation. But at the same time the model of "Choice" and "Free will" must allow a saint to make a bad choice JUST as it allows Adam to have made a bad choice. That means that although you really ARE saved today - 10 years from today you may choose to rebell against God and go your own way. This is perfectly in keeping with the model of Arminianism that would conclude you really ARE saved today and really ARE lost 10 years from today.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hello Bob,

You have sure given me a lot to go on there.

Please wait to post to me for awhile and give me an opprtunity to respond.

Those are a lots of posts..I thought I posted alot!

I have a full time job and cant always be on here.

God willing, I plan on a response.

1 Cor 11..or..1 Cor 9:27?

Regards, KJB

 

1 Cor 9:27 - I have no idea why I kept referring to 1Cor 11. Good catch!

Take your time - but you may want to PM me to make sure I catch it.

God's blessings.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Thanks Bob!

On the verse about Paul in Cor 9:27 I see it not as a salvation issue but as an issue of Christian discipline.

On the Romans 10 issue I find it goes much deeper that what the Arminians claim if it is only "jumping through hoops".

What I mean is even the demons confessed Jesus Christ was the Son of God which was more that what the Jews would do.

I am certain we will both agree that the demons were not saved.

Jesus said that not every one who calls me "Lord, Lord" will get into heaven.

The defining factor was not a matter of if people knew Him...the defining factor was "I never knew you".

This "knew" is intimate....the same type of word used as with man and wife. (Not speaking of sex)

I am sure you and I both could write post after post after post on just these two topics alone.

I want to let you know I enjoy all of these topics and would like to ask another favor.

I feel that we both may have more questions on our plates from each other than what is capable for me to answer in each sitting that I have here on my computer.

I would like to go through each and every topic because it is stimulating and gets my thinking and doing research.

I am enjoying this discussion.

Out of each and every question and topic you and I have brought up, can we stick with one and go through it before we go to another?

You can pick out of any...3 point, 5 point, Romans 10, 1 Cor 9, Arminianism, TULIP......etc.

I find that you are able to respond quite well while I still dont even know how to use the quote thing on this site yet!

Please let me know....

Thanks and regards, KJB

 

If "being disqualified from the Gospel" still means forgiven and saved. Then you need more definitions for "Gospel" and "disqualified" than we would actually have today.

Don't get me wrong. I fully understand why you would need those new definitions (or redefinitions) as Calvinism often does.

But you have to admit that method is taking what you see in the text and then trying to rework what you read so it fits your model.

Kind of embarrassing in this particular example.

In Christ,

Bob

 

KJB, welcome!

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJB

By the same token if people rely on themselves to initiate and keep their salvation, they most certainly are not secure. They have their faith not in Jesus Christ, but in themselves.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you misunderstand. Man does not rely on themselves to initiate and keep their salvation (at least I don't). Salvation is the gift of God. We have to do nothing to accept that gift except have faith. To say "having faith" is doing it yourself, or working for salvation, is not correct.

Something to consider. If I buy a homeless man a meal and put it in fron of him, does he have to eat it? Did he have to work for it? Did he buy it or do anything to earn it? Was the meal paid for? The only thing he has to do is accept it, but he can also reject it and starve. God's grace (unmerited favor) toward ALL mankind is similar.

 

[qoute]KJB -

On the Romans 10 issue I find it goes much deeper that what the Arminians claim if it is only "jumping through hoops".
[/quote]

I don't know about "hoops" but I can follow the reading of the text and it does show a "sequence".

Are you trying to say that when a stated sequence in scripture does not match Calvinism's biased expectation we should call that sequence "hoops"??

That probably works great as a suggestion to fellow Calvinists - but it is not an objective enough approach to work across models where people do not take that bias to the Rom 10 text.

Agreed?

So if we can agree that the sequence given in the text is "valid" - then we come to the meaning and context for "confess" as you point out.

If this is demons "confessing" in Romans 10 we have problems as you point out.

The text says Confess AND Believe -- then you WILL be saved.

This is an impossible sequence to avoid. And the context does not indicate a kind of "demonic confession" but rather the confession of those that believe.

Salvation then follows.

This is the Arminian model perfectly stated.

Impossible to miss.

And for that reason I say that Arminians DO see themselves DOING that and say "hey guys guess what - I DO have assurance of salvation".

Pretty obvious.

The "difference" is what do they do when they see that 10 years from today they fail to persevere.

Do they retro-delete their old assurance?

Do they ignore the scriptures on perseverance and claim to be saved "anyway"?

Etc.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Sure thing.

Quote is easy just click on the icon in one of my posts at the upper right that says quote. (hint - pick a small post of mine like the one that follows this) It will snap my text into your reponse and will show you what the quote tags look like as they are placed around the text. Then you can delete out the sections of my post you don't want to include.

I am happy to zero in on a specific topic.

Lets start by assuming the following points as a given.

#1. The Bible contains 66 books - all of which are inspired by God and infallible.

#2. There is only ONE Gospel (Gal 1:6-11)

#3. Mankind at the fall became totally depraved (Rom 3:9-12) and does not seek after God based on his sinful nature alone.

#4. The Drawing of God mentioned in John 6 and in John 12 is sufficient to enable action - accepting eternal life. As one Calvinist on this board put it "The Drawing of God enables the choice that TD disables".

#5. God is all-knowing, God IS Love, God is Just and God is all-powerful

#6. God has free will.

Then lets pick one of the following for debate/review/comparison


#1. The Love of God for the lost.
#2. The difference between a saved person and a lost person. That is how does the BIBLE describe the saved walk with Christ?
#3. The "mechanism" that allows sinless perfect Lucifer and sinless perfect Adam to sin.
#4. The open debate of Job 1 and 2 where God is directly challenged and "proves his argument" using the life of Job.
#5. Does foreknowledge stop free will choice?

In Christ,

Bob

 

We could also choose Matt 18 "Forgiveness revoked" as a topic if you would like.

 

That's rejecting church discipline Bob. It is not a sotierlogical issue.

 

I was talking about the "Forgiveness revoked" example that Christ gave where he ends it with "So shall My Heavenly Father do to each one of you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart".

He says that after the real life intro of Peter asking about forgiveness and Christ giving the real life answer that 70x7 is not even sufficient. Then He says in real life "For THIS REASON the kingdom of heaven may be compared to..." and gives the story. Concluding with the real life warning "SO shall My FAther do to EACH one of you that does not forgive his brother from his heart".

In the story the BASIS for forgiving our fellow man is the REALITY of our forgiveness received and effectively realized - from God.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hello Bob,

Thanks for the tip on the quote.....I will try it out this time.

I will also try to concentrate on one topic at a time due to time constraint.

I do not agree with you in regard to 1 Cor 9:27 as being an issue of salvation.

I would like to clear up this not so particularly embarrassing example first.

You posted,

Here is the text;

Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

Now before we examine this text, I find it would be very beneficial and necessary to note that Paul is the one who wrote it.

This is the same Paul we find teaching the fact (correct doctrine) that people are saved not by works, not by effort, not by human will, not by beating their bodies (discipline), not anything of ourselves, and not by anything other than......grace (Unmerited favor).

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works so that no one can boast.

This is a clear and concise proclamation showing that people are SAVED by Grace.

If people are saved by grace, what need is there to discipline their flesh for salvation?

I am not saying there is not good to be found in discipline.

What Paul is saying in this message of 1 Cor 9:27 is that he is keeping himself disciplined not for his sake, but for the sake of all others including His Lord and Savior.

Part of the reason was that he wished to present himself "properly presentable" so he would not be a point that any person could stumble on.

Paul wanted to represent Jesus Christ as a model of a person, not as an un-disciplined preacher.

He was not showing interest in all of their things and stuff, he showed he had interest in them!

He is also speaking about this compulsion he has as not being related to earthly rewards and all the things that he should be entitled to here on earth.

He was concerned with heavenly rewards. He was focused on heavenly things.

He says so earlier in the letter;

For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.

For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.

What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel.

For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more.

I would suggest reading from the start of 1 Cor to gain a better understanding of where Paul stood and taught in regard to salvation.

At the very least start reading from 1 Cor 9:1 to gain a better perspective of what he was speaking about in 9:27.

Paul is one who has written such things as;

1 Cor 4:7 What makes you better than anyone else? What do you have that God hasn't given you? And if all you have is from God, why boast as though you have accomplished something on your own?

1 Cor 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them–yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me./B]

No indeed, I find myself incapable of agreement that 1 Cor 9:27 is a text speaking about Paul losing salvation.

I do not find my disagreement embarrassing at all.

I hope you will re-examine and concur.

I am sorry I simply do not have time to answer every question that is posed to me by every person.

I am sure we all have much to agree on....as well as much we may not agree on.

I will attempt to continue on one topic at a time.

God bless Bob!

God bless you all!

Regards, KJB

 

Paul also wrote this;

"Now it is GOD who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. HE annointed us, set HIS seal of ownership on us, and put HIS Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, GUARANTEEING what is to come." ~ (2 Cor 1:21-22)

Regards, KJB

 

KJB - good use of the quote!

"Details".

Paul is explicitly addressing the effort AND the prize/reward/result.

That is a pretty good argument against what Paul explicitly says "in the details" of the 1Cor 9 text.

But the fact that you have to directly contradict what Paul says in 1Cor 9 to eisegete it in a way that fits your model shows that you have failed to connect all the dots.

In fact that is a good sign in general that we are missing something.

Excuse me but to eisegete that way the text has to be turned to say "I buffet my body and make it my slave lest after I have preached the Gospel to others I should lessen the enjoyment of others in the Gospel".

(If I get your spin right).

The problem is that the details leading up the text AND the details IN the quote from vs 27 can not be spun around like that.

You are simply showing what you "needed" to have read instead of what you DID read.

You are also showing that you are much more comfortable with what Paul says in Ephesians 2:8-10 than what you actually find in 1Cor 9. But this really only shows a flaw in your model and very likely the fact that you have gone too far in what you assume from what Eph 2 does NOT actdually say to get it to so contradict what 1Cor 9 EXPLICITLY says.

How can that be considered a compelling argument?

In Christ,

Bob

 

If we are allowed to go to other texts for this -- then ok.

God's promises are conditional as Paul points out in Romans 9 and 11 for it is those "of FAITH" that are heirs of the promises and "THEY were BROKEN OFF due to UNBELIEF".

He does not argue "They were NEVER IN due to UNBELIEF" but where BROKEN OFF.

"And you stand ONLY by your faith so take heed and FEAR for IF He did NOT spare the natural branches NEITHER will He spare YOU" Romans 11.

The GUARANTEE is subject to that condition that PAUL defines.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

Good morning Bob!

I have read through all of your posts.

I am not going to do the quote thing today because I am quite sure you are capable to go back and read your own posts.

First of all Bob, I am giving no spin here.

God grants belief....period. God grants faith as a gift. It is not man made.

Those that God has intended to save by "grace" will believe.

All those appointed to eternal life "believed". (Acts)

This means God makes believers out of non-believers.

For to you it has been granted not only to believe in Him, but to suffer for His sake.....

This is true......God not only grants "belief" as a gift.....He also grants suffering.

Its really simple Bob. No tricks, no twists, no spins. Ask yourself two simple questions;

Are you saved by the grace of God?

OR

Are you saved by self discipline of your body?

You figure that one out. I would hope that you are humble enough to put no faith in yourself........and at leats a little in God!

Wishing you the best!

1 Cor 4:7 What makes you better than anyone else? What do you have that God hasn't given you? And if all you have is from God, why boast as though you have accomplished something on your own?

God bless. KJB