Following up on "If you are not a Calvinist..." thread

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

Didn't want to ignore Canady's reply on the previous thread. Been working on a pole barn and gearing up for Turkey processing, so been busy .

My comments from Canady's previous thread:
… I think all people can equally choose or not choose to believe when God illuminates their minds in that moment…...

@canadyjd questions:
I’d like to explore this statement with you. Ok?

Do you believe all people are “illumined”

Is the gospel necessary for salvation? I believe it is.

If the gospel is necessary for salvation, then God has limited who even has the possibility of salvation to those that hear the gospel. Do you agree?

peace to you

My thoughts:
I don't think all people are illumined, although everyone has the possibility to be.

Yes, the gospel is necessary for salvation.

I would agree that there is a limitation on who has the possibility to hear the Gospel as there are people who will go their whole lives without hearing it. I haven't thought about it enough though to work through whether I think that's God limiting it, or man's sin limiting it in not spreading the Gospel.

Either way though, I would say that those that never hear the gospel were never part of God's elect.

 

[1689Dave]

Didn't want to ignore Canady's reply on the previous thread. Been working on a pole barn and gearing up for Turkey processing, so been busy .

My comments from Canady's previous thread:
… I think all people can equally choose or not choose to believe when God illuminates their minds in that moment…...

@canadyjd questions:
I’d like to explore this statement with you. Ok?

Do you believe all people are “illumined”

Is the gospel necessary for salvation? I believe it is.

If the gospel is necessary for salvation, then God has limited who even has the possibility of salvation to those that hear the gospel. Do you agree?

peace to you

My thoughts:
I don't think all people are illumined, although everyone has the possibility to be.

Yes, the gospel is necessary for salvation.

I would agree that there is a limitation on who has the possibility to hear the Gospel as there are people who will go their whole lives without hearing it. I haven't thought about it enough though to work through whether I think that's God limiting it, or man's sin limiting it in not spreading the Gospel.

Either way though, I would say that those that never hear the gospel were never part of God's elect.

“Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.” Acts 10:34–35 (KJV 1900)

Only the Born-Again have these attributes. An example is Cornelius who did Born- Again works long before he heard Peter preach. You cannot hear the gospel in any true sense unless first Born Again.

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 (KJV 1900)

“But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” Luke 11:20 (KJV 1900)

 

[kyredneck]

I don't think all people are illumined, although everyone has the possibility to be.

On what condition does God choose those to be illumined?

 

[DaveXR650]

Only the Born-Again have these attributes. An example is Cornelius who did Born- Again works long before he heard Peter preach. You cannot hear the gospel in any true sense unless first Born Again.

I slightly disagree with the above scenario in that I think Cornelius was not saved before he heard Peter preach. Acts 11 verses 13-14 in the retelling of what happened it is mentioned that Peter "will tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved". I won't deny that God's Spirit was at work on Cornelius already but from this it looks like there is more to it than totally depraved, hate God, then BAM, born again. In some cases, a person may decide to read the Bible, then realize that they are in trouble with God, then realize they need to straighten up and fly right, they they realize they can't, then they realize even if they did they couldn't fix what they have already done wrong, then they despair and they realize the gospel is for them, they cast themselves on God's mercy based on Jesus finished work and are saved.

Now this thread is "If you're not a Calvinist". I am saying that an average old time Baptist could take the above scenario and agree with it totally. Many (not all) Calvinists would say that none of the above can happen because the first thing that happens is regeneration. They would pick at the idea of "he decided to read the Bible" (you can't do that on your own), and so on. Sometimes Calvinists forget that the 5 points of the TULIP and the strict order of salvation were designed by Reformation and Puritan era leaders to refute specific heresies not to be a rigid formula. This is why a lot of traditional Baptists won't go so far as to say they are Calvinists because they don't believe in such a rigid, mechanical order of salvation and they object to being corrected every time they mention the obvious working of God on someone's life if not expressed in Calvinist terms. And they object to being told that preaching that tells everyone to repent and believe the gospel is not quite correct because an unsaved person cannot believe the gospel even though there are hundreds of Puritan Calvinist sermons doing just that.

In other words, the reason many Baptists are not Calvinists is that they have come into contact with some Calvinists who are still in the "cage stage".

 

[1689Dave]

I slightly disagree with the above scenario in that I think Cornelius was not saved before he heard Peter preach. Acts 11 verses 13-14 in the retelling of what happened it is mentioned that Peter "will tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved". I won't deny that God's Spirit was at work on Cornelius already but from this it looks like there is more to it than totally depraved, hate God, then BAM, born again. In some cases, a person may decide to read the Bible, then realize that they are in trouble with God, then realize they need to straighten up and fly right, they they realize they can't, then they realize even if they did they couldn't fix what they have already done wrong, then they despair and they realize the gospel is for them, they cast themselves on God's mercy based on Jesus finished work and are saved.

Now this thread is "If you're not a Calvinist". I am saying that an average old time Baptist could take the above scenario and agree with it totally. Many (not all) Calvinists would say that none of the above can happen because the first thing that happens is regeneration. They would pick at the idea of "he decided to read the Bible" (you can't do that on your own), and so on. Sometimes Calvinists forget that the 5 points of the TULIP and the strict order of salvation were designed by Reformation and Puritan era leaders to refute specific heresies not to be a rigid formula. This is why a lot of traditional Baptists won't go so far as to say they are Calvinists because they don't believe in such a rigid, mechanical order of salvation and they object to being corrected every time they mention the obvious working of God on someone's life if not expressed in Calvinist terms. And they object to being told that preaching that tells everyone to repent and believe the gospel is not quite correct because an unsaved person cannot believe the gospel even though there are hundreds of Puritan Calvinist sermons doing just that.

In other words, the reason many Baptists are not Calvinists is that they have come into contact with some Calvinists who are still in the "cage stage".

Babies never hear the gospel but go to heaven if they die. How does the gospel save us? You must be saved to believe it. But then it saves us from our lifestyle. In Cornielus' case, from Roman culture. A Muslim might be born again but the gospel saves them from Islam. If we have eternal life, we were always saved and always will be.

Jesus says all the Father gives to Him will come to Him. Those who reject Calvinism haven't experienced it or they would embrace it. I call myself a Calvinist but only believe the first 3 points are accurate.

 

[DaveXR650]

1689Dave. I agree with you about the babies and so do most Calvinists - but some really don't! Another reason why you might not want to be a Calvinist.

What you are saying about having to be saved before you can believe is an example of Calvinists worrying too much about detail of expression. No one who believes is not saved and no one is saved who doesn't believe. I understand how you are using "saved" in the Muslim example but saved in the theological sense refers to justification and salvation. Some Calvinists on here actually believe you can't preach repentance and belief to unsaved people.

Jesus says all that the Father gives to him will come to him and it also says that no one who comes to him will be cast out. A traditional Baptist who used to consider himself a moderate Calvinist goes nuts when you only quote the first part and not the second. One more reason they won't be called a Calvinist.

None of this applies to you if you are a 3 pointer. I am curious as to why you reject the P. That would be in the scope of this thread since a 3 pointer is not a Calvinist.

 

[canadyjd]

Babies never hear the gospel but go to heaven if they die. How does the gospel save us? You must be saved to believe it. But then it saves us from our lifestyle. In Cornielus' case, from Roman culture. A Muslim might be born again but the gospel saves them from Islam. If we have eternal life, we were always saved and always will be.

Jesus says all the Father gives to Him will come to Him. Those who reject Calvinism haven't experienced it or they would embrace it. I call myself a Calvinist but only believe the first 3 points are accurate.

People cannot be saved without God’s intervention. I believe the gospel is necessary for salvation.

God Holy Spirit is certainly able to reveal Christ and Him crucified to all, even babies in the womb in such a way they understand even if we cannot.

I acknowledge very little support for such doctrine, aside from David’s comments concerning His deceased son and Jesus speaking of children and saying such are the kingdom of heaven or words to that effect.

The gospel doesn’t save Muslims from Islam, it is the God ordain method of bringing the chosen to salvation and saves believers from the wrath of God.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Didn't want to ignore Canady's reply on the previous thread. Been working on a pole barn and gearing up for Turkey processing, so been busy .

My comments from Canady's previous thread:
… I think all people can equally choose or not choose to believe when God illuminates their minds in that moment…...

@canadyjd questions:
I’d like to explore this statement with you. Ok?

Do you believe all people are “illumined”

Is the gospel necessary for salvation? I believe it is.

If the gospel is necessary for salvation, then God has limited who even has the possibility of salvation to those that hear the gospel. Do you agree?

peace to you

My thoughts:
I don't think all people are illumined, although everyone has the possibility to be.

Yes, the gospel is necessary for salvation.

I would agree that there is a limitation on who has the possibility to hear the Gospel as there are people who will go their whole lives without hearing it. I haven't thought about it enough though to work through whether I think that's God limiting it, or man's sin limiting it in not spreading the Gospel.

Either way though, I would say that those that never hear the gospel were never part of God's elect.

Thank you for following up. I agree with almost everything you stated.

peace to you

 

[1689Dave]

1689Dave. I agree with you about the babies and so do most Calvinists - but some really don't! Another reason why you might not want to be a Calvinist.

What you are saying about having to be saved before you can believe is an example of Calvinists worrying too much about detail of expression. No one who believes is not saved and no one is saved who doesn't believe. I understand how you are using "saved" in the Muslim example but saved in the theological sense refers to justification and salvation. Some Calvinists on here actually believe you can't preach repentance and belief to unsaved people.

Jesus says all that the Father gives to him will come to him and it also says that no one who comes to him will be cast out. A traditional Baptist who used to consider himself a moderate Calvinist goes nuts when you only quote the first part and not the second. One more reason they won't be called a Calvinist.

None of this applies to you if you are a 3 pointer. I am curious as to why you reject the P. That would be in the scope of this thread since a 3 pointer is not a Calvinist.

Before the new birth, you are dead and cannot discern the true Christ. Yes, many believe in a false Christ idol they fabricate from scripture. But only the saved can see the true Christ in scripture and sense Him in their hearts. His Spirit bears witness with their spirit.

Does God save a person when they choose to believe with the sinful flesh? Or, does God save people so they can discern and believe in the true Christ?

 

[1689Dave]

People cannot be saved without God’s intervention. I believe the gospel is necessary for salvation.

God Holy Spirit is certainly able to reveal Christ and Him crucified to all, even babies in the womb in such a way they understand even if we cannot.

I acknowledge very little support for such doctrine, aside from David’s comments concerning His deceased son and Jesus speaking of children and saying such are the kingdom of heaven or words to that effect.

The gospel doesn’t save Muslims from Islam, it is the God ordain method of bringing the chosen to salvation and saves believers from the wrath of God.

peace to you

Are you thinking there are no Muslim converts to Christ? How about the ones who paid with their lives for believing in Christ?

 

[AustinC]

Before the new birth, you are dead and cannot discern the true Christ. Yes, many believe in a false Christ idol they fabricate from scripture. But only the saved can see the true Christ in scripture and sense Him in their hearts. His Spirit bears witness with their spirit.

Does God save a person when they choose to believe with the sinful flesh? Or, does God save people so they can discern and believe in the true Christ?

The dialogue between Christian and Ignorance in Pilgrims Progress.:
The Pilgrim's Progress - discourse of Christian and Ignorance

Read the dialogue and you will find the fabrication you speak of.

 

[DaveXR650]

Does God save a person when they choose to believe with the sinful flesh? Or, does God save people so they can discern and believe in the true Christ?

I think that there is no conflict between choosing to believe and involving the will and actually being born again. Yes, you cannot truly come to Christ with the sinful flesh. But I maintain that the work of the Holy Spirit will manifest itself in what look like normal human acts of the will. How do you know a person is born again? The actually choose to come to Christ and believe on Him. Why did Jesus talk about the importance of believing after telling Nicodemus that he must be born again.

If you are saying that it is possible for people to come in the flesh and believe in a non saving way because they have a mistaken or false faith then I agree 100%. Some might just want to avoid the dangers of sin or think they may gain success in this life. Or they may have been talked into "making a decision" by an over zealous worker.

But I'm saying that use whatever term you want; a born again, regenerated, enlightened, quickened, awakened, person who has been given new life by God will immediately actively come to Christ to close with Him, and trust Him and believe in Him and he wills and chooses to do that.

So I would say it is not improper to say that God saves a person when he chooses to believe (with all the above in mind).

 

[DaveXR650]

The dialogue between Christian and Ignorance in Pilgrims Progress.:
The Pilgrim's Progress - discourse of Christian and Ignorance

Read the dialogue and you will find the fabrication you speak of.

Ignorance: When do our thoughts of ourselves agree with the Word of God?
Chr: When we pass the same judgement upon ourselves which the Word passes....

The true work of God's Spirit will always manifest itself in humans as direct actions involving the person's will. Notice how the argument with Ignorance appeals to his conscious intellect and his will and the argument is made to him in a way that he is warned to change his opinion. (But he won't, without the work of the Holy Spirit of course).

 

[Reformed1689]

Babies never hear the gospel but go to heaven if they die.

We cannot claim this definitively. The Bible does not state this.

 

[Reformed1689]

Jesus says all the Father gives to Him will come to Him. Those who reject Calvinism haven't experienced it or they would embrace it. I call myself a Calvinist but only believe the first 3 points are accurate.

Then by definition you are not a Calvinist.

 

[1689Dave]

I think that there is no conflict between choosing to believe and involving the will and actually being born again. Yes, you cannot truly come to Christ with the sinful flesh. But I maintain that the work of the Holy Spirit will manifest itself in what look like normal human acts of the will. How do you know a person is born again? The actually choose to come to Christ and believe on Him. Why did Jesus talk about the importance of believing after telling Nicodemus that he must be born again.

If you are saying that it is possible for people to come in the flesh and believe in a non saving way because they have a mistaken or false faith then I agree 100%. Some might just want to avoid the dangers of sin or think they may gain success in this life. Or they may have been talked into "making a decision" by an over zealous worker.

But I'm saying that use whatever term you want; a born again, regenerated, enlightened, quickened, awakened, person who has been given new life by God will immediately actively come to Christ to close with Him, and trust Him and believe in Him and he wills and chooses to do that.

So I would say it is not improper to say that God saves a person when he chooses to believe (with all the above in mind).

If you must choose to believe it is because you don't believe.

Have you ever chosen to believe you were walking down the street? Of course not. Why? Because the experience convinces you of the reality. So it is with Christ. He is an experience you cannot doubt.

 

[canadyjd]

Are you thinking there are no Muslim converts to Christ? How about the ones who paid with their lives for believing in Christ?

No. Not sure how you got that from what I said. Of course anyone of any faith or no faith will be saved should God intervene and make it so.

Peace to you

 

[DaveXR650]

If you must choose to believe it is because you don't believe.

Have you ever chosen to believe you were walking down the street? Of course not. Why? Because the experience convinces you of the reality. So it is with Christ. He is an experience you cannot doubt.

I agree with the in belief "the experience convinces you of the reality". That's a really good way to put it I think. But there is a lot of will involved in belief. It's not wrong to say "well, he convinced himself that that wouldn't happen" or "he decided he could fly". There you have a "decision" even. Doesn't it say somewhere in the Bible that some people wouldn't believe because they feared the religious leaders. Maybe this is all a matter of terminology. I am saying for example like in the dialogue posted by AustinC from Pilgrims Progress it is legitimate to actively try to convince someone to believe by presenting a case. As in Pilgrims Progress Christian tried to inform Ignorance that he was really still in his sins. Ignorance needed to change his opinion and believe differently. I say that it is proper to exhort someone to believe something and your hope is that they will come to believe and see it your way (actually the Bible way). Calvinist preachers did and do this all the time.

 

[1689Dave]

I agree with the in belief "the experience convinces you of the reality". That's a really good way to put it I think. But there is a lot of will involved in belief. It's not wrong to say "well, he convinced himself that that wouldn't happen" or "he decided he could fly". There you have a "decision" even. Doesn't it say somewhere in the Bible that some people wouldn't believe because they feared the religious leaders. Maybe this is all a matter of terminology. I am saying for example like in the dialogue posted by AustinC from Pilgrims Progress it is legitimate to actively try to convince someone to believe by presenting a case. As in Pilgrims Progress Christian tried to inform Ignorance that he was really still in his sins. Ignorance needed to change his opinion and believe differently. I say that it is proper to exhort someone to believe something and your hope is that they will come to believe and see it your way (actually the Bible way). Calvinist preachers did and do this all the time.

The human will is not involved in salvation. When God sends the Holy Spirit into a person's heart, they EXPERIENCE Christ. No choosing is necessary.

 

[DaveXR650]

Well. I guess we just see things differently in that I believe the will is involved in salvation and it is the will where the Spirit works. I don't believe your human depraved unchanged will would ever choose Christ. I think it's more a matter of terminology. Since you don't really claim to be a Calvinist and the thread is about why am I not a Calvinist I would be curious as to your objections to Calvinism. I consider myself a Calvinist and yet you're take on things seem to me to be a lot like what I would consider high Calvinism or even hyper Calvinism. I'm trying to figure all this out and I do appreciate your patience in responding to all these posts.