Can a Calvinist know for sure?

OldRegular,

After seeing your last post on this topic, I took a look at your topic about God being sovereign in the election of people to salvation.......well done and great post!

Very glad to meet you. Glad you came on this topic.

I dont have a lot of time one here so I will probably only be on one topic at a time.



Regards, KJB

 

A poster on another thread questioned the assurance of a Calvinist.

I was going to start a thread on assurance; saw this one and thought I would bump it to the front.

I haven't read the entirety and it was started before I got back online. But I will read through it and encourage anyone who doubts the assurance of a Sovreignly Elected Child of God to do the same.

If your questions remain, continue the discussion.

I will tell you the assurance of one resting in Christ, having been brought to the knowledge of Sovereign Grace, has no depth we can fathom.

2Co 7:10 (KJV) For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

May God Bless,
Bro. Dallas

 

Paul wrote Eph 2 and Paul wrote 1Cor 9.

The "solution" is not to bend either text.

If we "eisegete" either text in what it DOES NOT say -- then likely we will feel the need to avoid the details in one and highlight the places that we want to make inferences in the other.

Hopefully that much is clear.

I have been having a good time repeatedly pointing out the details in 1Cor 9 that keep getting "glossed over" on the responses.

That makes my job easy.

You and others have wanted to focus on Eph 2 instead. I am glad to affirm the details IN the text in Eph 2.

But not to bend them to the point that we can no longer tolerate what 1Cor 9 ACTUALLY says and so can only at best tolerate "rephrasing 1Cor 9 to ourselves" saying what "we wish we had read" instead of what the text actually says IN the text!

Sorry if this was a little blunt - but that is the sore point I have been highlighting during the conversation.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I think it is agreed by both Calvinist and Arminians that all would like to have the best possible model for assurance. (Best soteriology for assurance).

This thread was started to see how well various Calvinist models fared if one is really focused on the foundation of assurance.

The entire notion that assurance can be retro-deleted back to today when one is found to "Fail to persevere" 20 years from today -- is a problem for "assurance" that can not be swept under the rug.

Your point that assurance exists is valid. But the argument is that the model may be flawed - and the reality of assurance may simply help us challenge the model that shows such "assurance" to be without a foundation.

How can you be "assured" that you live in your own house today - if 20 years from now a Tax audit determines your house TODAY to belong to someone else? Where is your "assurance"?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

It's all ok.....actually it is not blunt at all.

Most of the time to be quite honest with you I can't even follow along with what you are trying to point out.

I am not saying that to offend you.

When I do seem to feel that I am grasping what you are trying to point out....I find we are speaking with the same words ("grace" for example) but with different meanings for the same words.

Thats why I asked a simple question hoping you would answer yes meaning yes.....or no meaning no.

It is hardly easy to discuss anything when people are not even on the same playing field.

Paul is crystal clear in many places.

So if you think Paul is saying he has to do something to obtain and keep his salvation........we must remember he has always taught that salvation is of God's grace as a gift.

If people are saved by grace....it is done!

There is nothing a person can add to grace.....if it is required that people add something.....well then grace is no longer grace.

Otherwise it would read more liike this;

You are offered salvation if you choose it.

So Paul is not talking about an offer to all people......but a declaration of how people were saved if indeed they are saved.

I am not trying to be rude to you....please understand that....I find it very hard to communicate with you is all.



Frogman,

Great verse!

2Co 7:10 (KJV) For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

God bless you both! KJB

 

I was merely pointing out the "Details" of 1Cor 9 because it is those "details" that people often need to "gloss over" when taking other texts "to extremes".

The more reluctant one is to see the actual details in the text the more likely they have taken some other text "to an extreme" by eisegeting INTO that other text meanings that it never really had to start with.

Paul is the author of both Eph 2 and 1Cor 9. We can no more "ignore" 1Cor 9 "details" than those in Eph 2.

If our view of grace makes the words of Paul "unreadable" in 1Cor 9 -- or "much to be avoided" as we have seen here -- then we should be able to see that as a red flag telling us something is wrong.

So while I am quick to answer "yes" to "Saved by grace through faith" -- agreeing with the "details" of Eph 2 - I am also very reluctant to gloss over 1Cor 9 as many "need" to do.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Here again are the "details" that I see many needing to gloss over in 1Cor 9.

I am commenting on the very points in the text that need to be 'deleted' according to the soteriology of some models.

It is as a “fellow partaker of the GOSPEL” that Paul wants to participate in preaching. He then shows that his own example in persuing that goal of being “A fellow partaker of the Gospel” is the standard/model/role-model for the saints. He has left the realm of “I am a leader and Apostle and so I have special rights” to the perspective of WE ALL want to be “Fellow partakers” of the Gospel for as he has just pointed out when the Gospel is received the people are saved. (; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some.)

So now in this “fellow partaker of the Gospel” model for ALL that Paul is offering (in the form of his own life example) he shows how it works. He shows the perspective of the saint, the attitude, the focus the Olympic ALL for the Gospel focus that is NEEDED. IN fact he argues that it is critical EVEN for an Apostle for even in this most exaulted case HE is at risk “LEST after preaching the Gospel to other I MYSELF should be disqualified” from that very Gospel!

How instructive!

 

Bob,

Glossing over details? You vewy vewy funny guy!

Just because you don't accept the explanations of many people on this forum, it hardly proves we are glossing over details!

I can plaster my posts if you wish...but would you read it all?

Here are some details for you;

The principal things in this chapter are the proof of the apostle's office and authority; arguments for his own maintenance, and the maintenance of Gospel ministers; reasons why he did not make use of his right and privilege in this respect: and the whole is concluded with an exhortation to diligence and perseverance in the Christian course of life, of which he himself was an example. He begins with his office, as an apostle, and proves it; partly by his independency on men, not having his call and mission from them; and partly by his corporeal sight of Christ, and the authority which he in person received from him; and also by the success of his ministry among the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 9:1, wherefore, whatever might be objected to him by other persons, they had no reason to object to his apostleship, seeing they, being converted under his ministry, were so many seals of it, 1 Corinthians 9:2, and since his call to the ministry was firm and valid, he had a right, as other ministers, to a maintenance of himself and family, should he have any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands, 1 Corinthians 9:3, which he proves from the law of nature and nations, exemplified in the cases of soldiers, planters of vineyards, and keepers of flocks, who by virtue of their calling and service have a right to a livelihood, between whom, and ministers of the Gospel, there is some resemblance, 1 Corinthians 9:7, and also from the law of Moses, particularly the law respecting the ox, which was not to be muzzled when it tread out the corn; and which he observes is to be understood, not only and barely in the letter of oxen, but of ministers of the word, who are as husbandmen that plough and thresh in hope, and therefore should be partakers of their hope, 1 Corinthians 9:8. Moreover, the apostle argues the right of the maintenance of the ministers of the Gospel, from the justice and equity of the thing, that seeing they minister spiritual things, it is but reasonable that they should receive temporal ones, 1 Corinthians 9:11, and which the apostle argues for himself, and Barnabas, as from the instances of other apostles, 1 Corinthians 9:5, so from the examples of those that succeeded him in Corinth, who were maintained by that church; though he did not think fit, when among them, to claim his right, and make use of his power, lest any check should be put to the progress of the Gospel, 1 Corinthians 9:12. And he goes on to make this point clear and manifest from the case of, the priests and Levites under the former dispensation, who ministering in holy things, had a provision made for them, 1 Corinthians 9:13.
And lastly, from the constitution and appointment of Christ himself, who has ordained it as a law of his, that the preachers of the Gospel should live of it, 1 Corinthians 9:14, though the apostle himself did not make use of this his privilege; nor would he ever make use of it, especially at Corinth, for which he gives his reasons; and his principal one was, that his glorying might not be made void, 1 Corinthians 9:15 which did not lie in preaching the Gospel, for that he was obliged to do, 1 Corinthians 9:16, for if he had engaged in it of his own accord, he would have had his reward; but since it was through necessity, he could not claim any, 1 Corinthians 9:17, or if any, it could be no other than to preach the Gospel "gratis," and without charge, which was the thing he gloried in, 1 Corinthians 9:18, and thus, though he lived independent of men, both with respect to his office and his maintenance, yet in order to gain souls to Christ, and be the instrument of their salvation, he became a servant to all, 1 Corinthians 9:19, who are distributed into three sorts, the Jews that were under the law, 1 Corinthians 9:20, the Gentiles that were without the law, 1 Corinthians 9:21, and weak Christians, 1 Corinthians 9:22, all which he did, not with any lucrative view to himself, but for the sake of the Gospel, that he might partake of that, and of the glory he was called unto by it, 1 Corinthians 9:23 which, and not temporal things, he was looking unto, and pressing after; and which he illustrates by a metaphor taken from the Grecian games, well known to the Corinthians, particularly that of running races, in which all ran, but one only had the prize: wherefore he exhorts the Corinthians to run in like manner, that they may obtain the prize which he mentions, and describes as an incorruptible crown, in opposition to a corruptible one, which others strove for, 1 Corinthians 9:24, and to this he animates by his own example and conduct, which he expresses in terms borrowed from racers and wrestlers, expressive of his humility, sobriety, and temperance; which things he exercised, that whilst he was a preacher to others, he might not be worthy of reproof and disapprobation himself, 1 Corinthians 9:26.


I myself should be a castaway, or rejected, or disapproved of; that is, by men: the apostle's concern is, lest he should do anything that might bring a reproach on the Gospel; lest some corruption of his nature or other should break out, and thereby his ministry be justly blamed, and be brought under contempt; and so he be rejected and disapproved of by men, and become useless as a preacher: not that he feared he should become a reprobate, as the word is opposed to an elect person; or that he should be a castaway eternally, or be everlastingly damned; for he knew in whom he had believed, and was persuaded of his interest in the love of God, and that he was a chosen vessel of salvation, that could not be eternally lost: though supposing that this is his sense, and these his fears and concern, it follows not as neither that he was, so neither that he could be a lost and damned person: the fears of the saints, their godly jealousies of themselves, and pious care that they be not lost, are not at all inconsistent with the firmness of their election, their security in Christ, and the impossibility of their final and total falling away; but on the contrary are overruled, and made use of by the Spirit of God, for their final perseverance in grace and holiness.

That is from John Gill.

You may find and read his entire exposition of 1 Corinthians 9 here at this site;

http://eword.gospelcom.net/comments/1corinthians/gill/large/1corinthians9.htm

Saved and kept by the grace of God!

God bless you! KJB

 

Notice the subtle "shift in detail" in your quote above?

It QUOTES THE TEXT to say "LEST I MYSELF should be disqualified" -- but then it "turns it" just enough to redirect the text "INTO" becoming "LEST my MINISTRY should be blammed"

That subtle shift AWAY FROM "I myself DISQUALIFIED" as I preach the GOSPEL (a case where the MINISTRY succeeds in preaching the REAL Gospel but I MYSELF am disqualified) -- is apparent in your quote.

Thank you for being brave enough to post it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

Please read the entire post!

After that, I really think you need to take your tablets!

Saved by grace..........not by preaching to others for no pay.

So are you saved by the grace of God?

Or are you offered to save yourself by some sort of effort?

You be the judge!

God bless you! Thanks KJB

 

The switch identified -- exists as "quoted" from your source where IT focused on the END of the chapter.

What more did you hope for? Misdirection?

I ALSO gave a reference to those early TOPICS in 1Cor 9 about "paying pastors" but when I mentioned it - the CAlvinist response was that the "details" were long and too tiresome to read.

Did you want to go back to those "other topics" as listed in your post?

Are you one who is willing to read them?

IF so I will post "the details" from the earlier section of 1Cor 9.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I have already "shown" the progression in 1Cor 9 from a focus on purely temporal issues like "paying a pastor" to the SALVIFIC issues of the Gospel "That SAVES". The section that focuses on the temporal issues - matches with Gills comments.

Though the post was ignored by the Calvinist readers - I will post it "again" since KJB is supposedly expressing interest in those "details".

Paul argues for equality with the Apostles for both he and Barnabas – and that the church members “ought” to support them in the same way. (Nothing mentioned so far about an imperishable promise/prizee/reward).

He is not claiming that ALL church members – all saints – have the right to “refrain from working” as in secular employment.

Paul continues with his focus on his leadership and the earthly payment – perishable support that it would earn.

Again in vs 7-11 – Paul speaks of the perishable temporal “material things” received “From you” in exchange for the “eternal” and “salvific” things sown by the Apostle.

Paul argues that it is right for those who work in spiritual ministry – to receive perishable – temporal good in fact “a living from the gospel”.

Having made that case – Paul then DENIES that he really wants any of those temporal benefits / rewards /

He claims that he values his “boast” higher than getting the earthly perishable temporal benefit from the church.

Now he will switch to the “Gospel” mission the “Gospel focus” the fact that His preaching of the Gospel of Salvation is such a consuming role that earthly benefit fades. He is under a higher calling

This is key – Paul has just said that his “reward” is to “offer the Gospel without charge”. This is not a setup for saying “I buffet my body and make it my slave lest I CHARGE someone a penny for speaking to them about the Gospel”. His focus has not gone there at all. Rather he is still talking about his boast that he is able to preach the Gospel without reaping the due benefit/reward of earthly perishable gain. And he even counts that fact as “his reward” because it leaves him free from the sense of “owing” anyone anything..

At this point Paul jumps fully into the topic of SALVATION! He argues the point of wining the lost. He shows that his focus and goal is fully set on the salvation that is brought through the preaching of the Gospel!

Wining here is “Wining souls for Christ” in the preaching of the Gospel. Preaching the Gospel to others – resulting in their Salvation!

</font>[/QUOTE]

 

Notice that Paul EXCLUDES HIMSELF from those temporal benefits claimed in 1Cor 9:1-14 IN vs 15-18?

He is not arguing for getting back INTO having himself INCLUDED in temporal blessings - for he BOASTS that he chooses NOT to go there!

Hence the focus in vs 19-27 on the SPIRITUAL benefit of the Gospel "Salvation".

Paul shows that the “SAVING’ them is the whole point of this Gospel preaching. He preaches the Gospel to others in order to SAVE them. He mentions nothing about those saved getting big houses in heaven nor does he mention what great honor and room-size reward he is seeking in heaven. His entire focus is not on “What perk do I get” but on the great value/reward of SALVATION itself as the goal and objective of the Gospel received when preached “to others”.

Now comes that “unpleasant section” for many where Paul points out the seriousness of this Gospel pursuit for the goal of saving people -- so that I may by all means save some. as he says.

It is as a “fellow partaker of the GOSPEL” that Paul wants to participate in preaching. He then shows that his own example in persuing that goal of being “A fellow partaker of the Gospel” is the standard/model/role-model for the saints. He has left the realm of “I am a leader and Apostle and so I have special rights” to the perspective of WE ALL want to be “Fellow partakers” of the Gospel for as he has just pointed out when the Gospel is received the people are saved. (; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some.)

So now in this “fellow partaker of the Gospel” model for ALL that Paul is offering (in the form of his own life example) he shows how it works. He shows the perspective of the saint, the attitude, the focus the Olympic ALL for the Gospel focus that is NEEDED. IN fact he argues that it is critical EVEN for an Apostle for even in this most exaulted case HE is at risk “LEST after preaching the Gospel to other I MYSELF should be disqualified” from that very Gospel!

How instructive!

Yet how fervently ignored by those who find this to be an “unpleasant” section of scripture!

Take each "detail" and show the meaning IN the 1Cor 9 context itself. Let the argument speak for itself IN the text you are exegeting.

Or do you read vs 23-27 and respond with

And so when Paul says

Do you respond with

"Are you saved by your efforts of paying close attention, persevering and taking pains with those disciplines?"

Will your response to each of these displeasing texts be simply to challenge them and show how your view of "other texts" don't allow these unpleasant texts to exist??


When Paul says

Do you respond with I would hope that you are humble enough to put no faith in yourself........and at least a little in God!

In an effort to misdirect away from the texts above where Paul is being crystal clear – perhaps when you see yourself needing to “gloss over” the details of these text and you respond to them as “inconvenient” to your views on other texts (like Eph 2 for example) it is a sign that those other texts are being taken to extremes in your interpretation.

When we let THE TEXT speak does it cause you to immediately jump to some other "more comfortable" text?

IF so - it is a sign that you have taken what your comfortable texts do not actually say explicitly and have added "inferences" that were never in those texts to start with.

In the case of these "unpleasant" texts - it is the mere quote of them and the insistence on seeing their details rather than glossing over them that is causes so many to have heart burn.

</font>[/QUOTE]IN Christ,

Bob