Four questions for Calvinists.

[JonC]

Except tht would see God as eally hving limited Himselfto knoingfuture ents, as he woulbe blind to tem until the happened in real time...

And Arminiasm still has ta pesky problem of Jesus did fo all, will ofGod to save all,, yet all not saved..

The difference is that some believe God does indeed know all that there is to know, but exclude contingent events or outcomes as being among "all there is to know". They don't view God as less omniscient (e.g., God's omnipotence is not threatened because God can't make a square circle. Open Theists like Brian McLaren consider pre-knowledge of such contingent events along the same lines). Reformational Arminianists, like Robert Picirilli, view God as completely omniscient to all things occuring in time. God knows who will respond and those are the ones He elects. Although the mode of divine knowledge is the same in salvation (God's knowledge is dependent on the result of human free-agency), I don't think it fair in any way to speak of Open Theism as a form of Arminianism. One (Open Theism) does view God as having limited himself to knowing future events, or that future contingent events (apart from God effecting an outcome) are unknowable. But Reformational or Classic Arminianism does not.

I also believe that Christ died for all, and even that God desires that all should be saved. And yet all are not saved.

 

[Yeshua1]

The difference is that some believe God does indeed know all that there is to know, but exclude contingent events or outcomes as being among "all there is to know". They don't view God as less omniscient (e.g., God's omnipotence is not threatened because God can't make a square circle. Open Theists like Brian McLaren consider pre-knowledge of such contingent events along the same lines). Reformational Arminianists, like Robert Picirilli, view God as completely omniscient to all things occuring in time. God knows who will respond and those are the ones He elects. Although the mode of divine knowledge is the same in salvation (God's knowledge is dependent on the result of human free-agency), I don't think it fair in any way to speak of Open Theism as a form of Arminianism. One (Open Theism) does view God as having limited himself to knowing future events, or that future contingent events (apart from God effecting an outcome) are unknowable. But Reformational or Classic Arminianism does not.

I also believe that Christ died for all, and even that God desires that all should be saved. And yet all are not saved.

Can God not reall know all things possible, and still remain God though? Can eb God ad everhave to know anything new to Him?
This viewpoint on God "knowing" is foreign to the Scriptures, ad createsa God in our own image...

 

[TCassidy]

Which is faulty, as they start with presumption tha there exists real free will now...

I suspect it is more that they don't understand what the term "free will" means.

Case in point: One of our erstwhile posters here on the Baptist Board, whom I often agree with, has, for a signature line, a paragraph which starts by saying, "Free will is defined as “volition” and this sustains the meaning that man has the ability to consciously choose; one cannot do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense."

As you can see, this erstwhile poster starts off with a mistaken premise: IE, that "Free will is defined as “volition” - which, of course, it is not. All people have volition. Everyone makes choices. But those choices are limited by their nature.

For instance, a fly can walk on the ceiling. I may want to walk on the ceiling, I may choose to walk on the ceiling, but I can't. Why not? It is not in my nature to be able to walk on the ceiling. But I can still walk, anywhere and at any time I choose to. I just can't walk where my nature forbids me to go.

Spiritually speaking, a person is only able to make choices within their moral nature. A lost man's free will is bound to the law of sin and death. He can only make choices that are compatible with his moral nature, in this case, fallen.

A saved man can make choices within his moral nature, which, after conversion, includes the ability to love, believe in, and obey God.

So, "free will" does not equate to "volition." All that we do we do of our own volition. But the will of the lost man remains bound to the law of sin and death. No matter how much he may want to go to heaven, he cannot do so because it is not within his fallen moral nature to accomplish that.

But the will of the saved man has been set free from the law of sin and death and is now, voluntarily, bound to the law of New Life in Christ. And now our moral nature (new life in Christ, and His Righteousness) allows us to believe, obey, and eventually, stand in His presence.

 

[Yeshua1]

I suspect it is more that they don't understand what the term "free will" means.

Case in point: One of our erstwhile posters here on the Baptist Board, whom I often agree with, has, for a signature line, a paragraph which starts by saying, "Free will is defined as “volition” and this sustains the meaning that man has the ability to consciously choose; one cannot do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense."

As you can see, this erstwhile poster starts off with a mistaken premise: IE, that "Free will is defined as “volition” - which, of course, it is not. All people have volition. Everyone makes choices. But those choices are limited by their nature.

For instance, a fly can walk on the ceiling. I may want to walk on the ceiling, I may choose to walk on the ceiling, but I can't. Why not? It is not in my nature to be able to walk on the ceiling. But I can still walk, anywhere and at any time I choose to. I just can't walk where my nature forbids me to go.

Spiritually speaking, a person is only able to make choices within their moral nature. A lost man's free will is bound to the law of sin and death. He can only make choices that are compatible with his moral nature, in this case, fallen.

A saved man can make choices within his moral nature, which, after conversion, includes the ability to love, believe in, and obey God.

So, "free will" does not equate to "volition." All that we do we do of our own volition. But the will of the lost man remains bound to the law of sin and death. No matter how much he may want to go to heaven, he cannot do so because it is not within his fallen moral nature to accomplish that.

But the will of the saved man has been set free from the law of sin and death and is now, voluntarily, bound to the law of New Life in Christ. And now our moral nature (new life in Christ, and His Righteousness) allows us to believe, obey, and eventually, stand in His presence.

We have meanst o freely choose to do whatevr is right to our sin natures, but accepting Jesus to get saved not one of tem!

As we wo uld resist doing that act ...

 

[utilyan]

Its our free will to be able to love God and decide not to that makes SIN a SIN.

Do any of you walk outside and glare at the rocks because they don't love, believe or obey God?


Matthew 6

25“For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26“Look at the birds of the air, that they do not sow, nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they? 27“And who of you by being worried can add a single hour to his life? 28“And why are you worried about clothing? Observe how the lilies of the field grow; they do not toil nor do they spin, 29yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these. 30“But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, will He not much more clothe you? You of little faith! 31“Do not worry then, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear for clothing?’ 32“For the Gentiles eagerly seek all these things; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.


Does a GENTILE need salvation? Do you need salvation? According to the Calvinist position we would have to respond to Jesus, NO we are not much worth then the birds we should toil and spin like crazy.

You don't SEEK the kingdom and righteousness, the kingdom and righteousness has to seek you first. THEN all things will be added to you.

If your seeking righteousness, that's a good hint you haven't got it.


BACKWARDS........BACKWARDS........BACKWARDS.

 

[crixus]

Its our free will to be able to love God and decide not to that makes SIN a SIN.

Do any of you walk outside and glare at the rocks because they don't love, believe or obey God?


Matthew 6

25“For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26“Look at the birds of the air, that they do not sow, nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they? 27“And who of you by being worried can add a single hour to his life? 28“And why are you worried about clothing? Observe how the lilies of the field grow; they do not toil nor do they spin, 29yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these. 30“But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, will He not much more clothe you? You of little faith! 31“Do not worry then, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear for clothing?’ 32“For the Gentiles eagerly seek all these things; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.


Does a GENTILE need salvation? Do you need salvation? According to the Calvinist position we would have to respond to Jesus, NO we are not much worth then the birds we should toil and spin like crazy.

You don't SEEK the kingdom and righteousness, the kingdom and righteousness has to seek you first. THEN all things will be added to you.

If your seeking righteousness, that's a good hint you haven't got it.


BACKWARDS........BACKWARDS........BACKWARDS.

If your seeking righteousness, that's a good hint you haven't got it. I wrote that one down to share with others. Thanks! *Here's some good stuff: https://www.fwbtheology.com/?s=calvinism

 

[glad4mercy]

You rejoice too fast....regeneration animates the corpse enabling the hearing....obviously. ...lol
If you think otherwise try starting some conversation in the graveyard. ...let us know how far you get with that....lol

Wouldn't get too far, because I am not God

 

[jeremiah1five]

Can the cross save a sinner BEFORE they hear the Gospel? (Romans 10:13-15)

Can a person be Christ's without the Holy Spirit? (Romans 8:9)

What is the God appointed means for a person receive the Holy Spirit? (Galatians 3:2)

Can a person be regenerated before receiving the Holy Spirit?

How can a person receive regeneration unconditionally, when receiving the Holy Spirit is conditioned on the HEARING OF FAITH?

So you have receiving the Holy Spirit necessary to regeneration, and you have the hearing of faith necessary to receiving the Holy Spirit, Therefore, the hearing of faith is necessary in regeneration.

And again, this is not synergism, folks.

If I may...
I am not Calvinist, but would like to reply.

Q1: "Can the cross save a sinner BEFORE they hear the Gospel? (Romans 10:13-15)"
A1: The answer is yes. God saves merely on His Promise TO save. Also, Paul is addressing a people in Rome ALREADY saved:

Romans 1:7 (KJV)
7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In Romans 10:6-11 Paul is quoting the Old Testament. The verses in 9 and 10 is NOT a salvation formula as many in Christendom believe and teach. It is error to tell a person to say "this" with your mouth and heart and you will be saved. It is a lie. Paul writes these verses to encourage the believers ALREADY saved in Rome and (Italy).

Q2: "Can a person be Christ's without the Holy Spirit? (Romans 8:9)"
A2: NO. As Paul further says in Romans:

Romans 8:9 (KJV)
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Q3: "What is the God appointed means for a person receive the Holy Spirit? (Galatians 3:2)"
A3: The good pleasure of His will:

Ephesians 1:5-7 (KJV)
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Q4: Can a person be regenerated before receiving the Holy Spirit?
A4: NO. The regeneration IS the Holy Spirit applying the salvation bought by the Son on Calvary.

END STATEMENT: So you have receiving the Holy Spirit necessary to regeneration, and you have the hearing of faith necessary to receiving the Holy Spirit, Therefore, the hearing of faith is necessary in regeneration.

RESPONSE: No, it is not. Christ is Faith Personified. It is not YOUR faith by which God honors that saves you, but Christ's Perfect Faith God honors and by which you are saved. Dead men have no faith.

Ephesians 2:1 (KJV)
1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Galatians 2:16 (KJV)
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is 2 years old. For that reason, I am closing it.