God so loved...

[David Lamb]

You cannot possibly believe a promise that was not made to you.

According to your doctrine, if you were not elected before the foundation of the world, then Jesus did not die for you, and his promise does not apply to you. If Jesus did not die for you, it doesn't matter what you believe, you are lost.

Your doctrine teaches that Jesus did not die for every man (Limited Atonement), therefore you have no idea if Jesus died for you.

How can you have faith in an uncertainty?

Fortunately, my God loves all men, and my Jesus died for all men. I know for a certainty his promise applies to me, therefore I can believe and depend upon it.

If I write or say something which turns out to be mistaken about someone else's beliefs, I would expect them to correct me.

But Winman, in post after post, you persist in telling me and anyone else who believes the doctrines of grace what we believe, and then criticise those beliefs.

I have tried, as have others far more able than I, to explain to you that we do not believe much of what you say we believe, but you still keep "correcting" us and telling us what our beliefs are.

OK, let me ask everyone: Is there one person on the Baptist Board, just a single one, who believes what Winman claims all Calvinists believe, "If Jesus did not die for you, it doesn't matter what you believe, you are lost."?

I'll concede that there could be a few people who do believe that you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and yet end up in hell because you are not among the elect, but please stop saying that that is part of Calvinism.

 

[psalms109:31]

Truth

I am so glad for America and the freedom that we have in religion and the other country that have it. So many went to America for freedom of religion and not to be beheaded for not preaching, believing what the country you lived in wanted you to preach. I will tell you what I would do to preach that you can come to Jesus and Jesus would not cast you out, even if I had to say that the religion that they want me to preach is the gospel.

Praise God that God had the Holy Bible translated the way He wanted it to be and man can't change the Holy Bible the way they want it, if they do try. God will provide a way to preserve it.

 

[Winman]

If I write or say something which turns out to be mistaken about someone else's beliefs, I would expect them to correct me.

But Winman, in post after post, you persist in telling me and anyone else who believes the doctrines of grace what we believe, and then criticise those beliefs.

I have tried, as have others far more able than I, to explain to you that we do not believe much of what you say we believe, but you still keep "correcting" us and telling us what our beliefs are.

OK, let me ask everyone: Is there one person on the Baptist Board, just a single one, who believes what Winman claims all Calvinists believe, "If Jesus did not die for you, it doesn't matter what you believe, you are lost."?

I'll concede that there could be a few people who do believe that you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and yet end up in hell because you are not among the elect, but please stop saying that that is part of Calvinism.

Well, here is an article from a reformed site, explaining what I have been saying.

http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH99/NH9912c.html

Now, I will just quote a few lines, not to misrepresent the article, but to save words only.

When people first begin to learn about the biblical doctrine of election, one question that often occurs to them is, “Am I elect?” And the more they think about whether or not they are elect, the more uncertain they become. So, if you believe in the doctrine of election, how do you know if you are elect?

The answer is really quite simple: You continue believing in Christ.

This is the opening line of the article, and I see several problems here. This writer is telling a person that they can know if they are elect if they believe. That is good, that is exactly what non-Cals like myself believe.

But there is a problem here for a Calvinist. A Calvinist is repeatedly told he cannot possibly believe unless he has been regenerated. He has been told there is false faith and saving faith. He has been told he cannot possibly grasp spiritual truths unless he has been regenerated.

So, you are still stuck with the problem of knowing whether you are elect and have been regenerated. First, how do you know you have been regenerated? Second, you have been told that it is impossible for you to believe. Third, you cannot have any confidence that your faith is a real saving faith, it could easily be a false faith. Fourth, you can't even be sure you understand what faith is, as you can only understand this if you have been regenerated. It is a vicious circle of doubt.

So, this fellow is telling his listeners to do what he has previously told them is impossible for them to do. Now that is a PROBLEM. I can't imagine this would give anyone any sort of confidence whatsoever. In fact, the writer admits that the more a person trys to determine if they are elect, the more full of doubt they become.

Now, I will skip the middle section of the article, but really it is the same, he is telling these people to believe. His last line is this:

How do I know if I’m elect? Believe what the elect believe, the gospel of God’s saving grace. (Read the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 3, section 6; chapter 10, sections 1�3; and chapter 18, sections 1�2.)

Once again, this sounds good on the surface. But to a person who has been convinced that he cannot possibly believe, this is like telling a pig to fly.

 

[jbh28]

Well, here is an article from a reformed site, explaining what I have been saying.

http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH99/NH9912c.html

Now, I will just quote a few lines, not to misrepresent the article, but to save words only.



This is the opening line of the article, and I see several problems here. This writer is telling a person that they can know if they are elect if they believe. That is good, that is exactly what non-Cals like myself believe.

Me too

But there is a problem here for a Calvinist. A Calvinist is repeatedly told he cannot possibly believe unless he has been regenerated.

So you believe in a saved, unregenerate person?

He has been told there is false faith and saving faith.

What, you mean like James 2:14-26?

He has been told he cannot possibly grasp spiritual truths unless he has been regenerated.

Depends on what is meant there.

So, you are still stuck with the problem of knowing whether you are elect and have been regenerated. First, how do you know you have been regenerated?

Evidence by your works. Read the book of James. Read the book of I John, especially I John 3:10. John tells us the difference between saved and unsaved. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5:17 that we are a "new creature."

Second, you have been told that it is impossible for you to believe.

Um...nope.

Third, you cannot have any confidence that your faith is a real saving faith, it could easily be a false faith.

Again, nope. you know if you have a real faith or not. It's not a surprise for you. People that pretend to be Christians know exactly what they are doing.

Fourth, you can't even be sure you understand what faith is, as you can only understand this if you have been regenerated. It is a vicious circle of doubt.

Again, more misrepresentation.

So, this fellow is telling his listeners to do what he has previously told them is impossible for them to do. Now that is a PROBLEM. I can't imagine this would give anyone any sort of confidence whatsoever. In fact, the writer admits that the more a person trys to determine if they are elect, the more full of doubt they become.

Which is why he said that's not what we should be focusing on.

Now, I will skip the middle section of the article, but really it is the same, he is telling these people to believe. His last line is this:



Once again, this sounds good on the surface. But to a person who has been convinced that he cannot possibly believe, this is like telling a pig to fly.

Did you even read the article or did you just cherry pick phrases to again try to make a Calvinist look bad. I'm not sure what you had against what the guy wrote. He didn't say it was impossible to believe. Of course it's possible for an unsaved person to believe. If not, then none of us would ever be saved as we were ALL unsaved at one point. Again, you just love your straw man version of Calvinism and that's all you have to offer. You cannot even take an article like this an talk about what the guy says. you have to add you straw man into it. Please share the quote where the guy said it's impossible to believe.

 

[TC]

Please share the quote where the guy said it's impossible to believe.

The article did not say it was impossible to believe - Winman is just interjecting what he (Winman) claims Calvinists believe into the article.

 

[Tom Butler]

Winman is having a big time yanking everybody's chain. All the while, he knows that non-Cals also believe that it is impossible for some to believe.

Which, I believe, is exactly what he accuses Calvinists of believing.

 

[Rippon]

Praise God that God had the Holy Bible translated the way He wanted it to be and man can't change the Holy Bible the way they want it, if they do try. God will provide a way to preserve it.

What,specifically, were you referencing by saying the above? But if it's too much of a rabbit trail you could post it in the appropriate forum.

 

[Winman]

Winman is having a big time yanking everybody's chain. All the while, he knows that non-Cals also believe that it is impossible for some to believe.

Which, I believe, is exactly what he accuses Calvinists of believing.

I believe that believeing is a choice that any person can make.

The only persons that cannot believe are those who have so willfully and continously rejected God that he gives them up and gives them over to a reprobate mind.

He is simply giving these people what they want. They desire to believe a lie, so he allows it.

 

[David Lamb]

Well, here is an article from a reformed site, explaining what I have been saying.

http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH99/NH9912c.html

Now, I will just quote a few lines, not to misrepresent the article, but to save words only.



This is the opening line of the article, and I see several problems here. This writer is telling a person that they can know if they are elect if they believe. That is good, that is exactly what non-Cals like myself believe.

I also believe that a person knows they are elect if they believe (on the Lord Jesus Christ, of course, not just believe any old thing), and have stated it recently in one of my replies to your posts.

But there is a problem here for a Calvinist. A Calvinist is repeatedly told he cannot possibly believe unless he has been regenerated. He has been told there is false faith and saving faith. He has been told he cannot possibly grasp spiritual truths unless he has been regenerated.

But the author is writing in a church magazine, and is addressing people who are already Christians. The very title of his article, "How do I know if I am elect?", is not a question that unbelievers are likely to ask. You seem to be saying that a person can be a Calvinist without even being a Christian. Christians who are Calvinists look back to their conversion, and thank God for His great mercy and grace in granting to them new life in Christ Jesus, but they were not Calvinists before they became Christians.

So, you are still stuck with the problem of knowing whether you are elect and have been regenerated. First, how do you know you have been regenerated? Second, you have been told that it is impossible for you to believe. Third, you cannot have any confidence that your faith is a real saving faith, it could easily be a false faith. Fourth, you can't even be sure you understand what faith is, as you can only understand this if you have been regenerated. It is a vicious circle of doubt.

Once again, this sounds good on the surface. But to a person who has been convinced that he cannot possibly believe, this is like telling a pig to fly.

I don't know the author of the article you linked to, but I can tell you that I know many people who espouse calvinistic doctrine, and have never yet heard even one tell unbelievers that they cannot possibly believe. I notice that no one on the Baptist Board has yet responded to my challenge in my earlier post:

OK, let me ask everyone: Is there one person on the Baptist Board, just a single one, who believes what Winman claims all Calvinists believe, "If Jesus did not die for you, it doesn't matter what you believe, you are lost."?

​

I wonder why the silence? Could it be that you, Winman, are mistaken in what you think Calvinists believe?

 

[psalms109:31]

What,specifically, were you referencing by saying the above? But if it's too much of a rabbit trail you could post it in the appropriate forum.

People will believe what the want to, the way they want to believe it.

I just trust God that He had the Holy Bible translated just the way He wanted it to be. He doesn't care if people don't like it or not. It is people theology to change it to fit their needs, if it doesn't say something that doesn't fit what they want to believe and find any means to do it. How hard is it to just trust God?

 

[Tom Butler]

I believe that believing is a choice that any person can make.

The only persons that cannot believe are those who have so willfully and continuously rejected God that he gives them up and gives them over to a reprobate mind.

He is simply giving these people what they want. They desire to believe a lie, so he allows it.

You're making my point, that for some, believing is impossible.

But I had another point in mind, actually two points.

The first is that if God chooses based on foreseen faith (which he doesn't), then only those whose faith he foresees will choose. Their destinies are fixed. It is not possible that someone whom God foresees will not have faith, will ever have faith, nor can they.

The second point is that for those who have never heard the Gospel, they also cannot choose faith. They do not know about Jesus, his death, burial and resurrection and the atonement. They cannot choose someone of whom they know little or nothing.

Unless one is prepared to argue that every person everywhere for the past 2,000 years has heard the gospel, then all can't always mean all.

 

[HankD]

Maybe somebody can help me out.

Find for me a verse in the New Testament where any believer said to a lost person, "Jesus loves you and died for you."

OK. I'll play the Arminius' Advocate:

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

HankD​

 

[Tom Butler]

OK. I'll play the Arminius' Advocate:

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

HankD​

Hank, I'm assuming that you're not a universalist. So, when Paul writes that God is the Savior of all men, I don't think you would hold that this means that all are saved from hell without exception. If they are, then there's no need to add "specially of those who believe."

If Paul had written that God wants to be the Savior of all men, then "specially of those who believe" would make sense. We could then read it that God wants to be the Savior of all men, but some won't believe, so he's the Savior of only those who believe.

But the text doesn't say that. It says God IS the Savior of all men.

That being the case, then "Savior" of all men must have a different application from salvation as we understand it. The question to answer is, in what sense is God the Savior of all men?

Rev. John Sampson summarizes it this way:

I believe then that 1 Timothy 4:10 teaches that we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior (Soter - preserver, sustainer, deliverer) of all people (showing mercy to all, each and every day they live), especially of those who believe (who receive full salvation from His wrath and everlasting life).

So, this verse cannot be used as a proof text that we can say "Jesus died for you," or "Jesus loves you."

 

[psalms109:31]

Loved the world

In 1993 when I started talking abouts God love for the world online. I never thought I would get resistance. I always heard calvinist say, I have always believed what I believed before I knew about calvinism through reading of the scripture. They just confimed what I already believed .

God has proven and convinced me in my youth, since I was an infant that God loved the world that He sent His Son and God made us the messenger of such a great news. Whosoever believes in Him shall be saved.

I even see election through God love for the world and the hope everyone has through Jesus Christ.

The more I read scripture the more I am convinced of this.

We have two people believing they have entering through two different doors trying to convince the other their's is wrong. Which is the right door, is it not Jesus?

 

[Tom Butler]

We have two people believing they have entering through two different doors trying to convince the other their's is wrong. Which is the right door, is it not Jesus?

Cals and non-Cals preach the same message of salvation through the same door.

The message is, all are sinners.

God says Jesus is the Way.

God commands all men to repent and trust Christ and him alone for salvation.

This is the message of both Cals and non-Cals. There are not two different doors.

 

[psalms109:31]

Cals and non-Cals preach the same message of salvation through the same door.

The message is, all are sinners.

God says Jesus is the Way.

God commands all men to repent and trust Christ and him alone for salvation.

This is the message of both Cals and non-Cals. There are not two different doors.

The problem we have is you can't open the door without belief without the word of Father through Jesus.

Where we disagree is, you can be elected, and not enter because of unbelief.

See I don't see inclined to believe, but two ways have been open by the words of Christ believe and be saved or continue in unbelief and be condemned.

You can be elected and not enter. Do you believe that? I do believe God loves the world and everyone has hope and we are the messengers.

Since God does love the word, it isn't God preventing them from entering but they are because of unbelief.

Jews are Elected, but the only reason they don't enter is because of unbelief. Since God doesn't show favoritism this hope is also given to us who are not Jews.

Then you say they have a veil, but if any of them even with the veil on turn to Jesus then only then will the veil be removed.

 

[HankD]

Hank, I'm assuming that you're not a universalist. So, when Paul writes that God is the Savior of all men, I don't think you would hold that this means that all are saved from hell without exception. If they are, then there's no need to add "specially of those who believe."

If Paul had written that God wants to be the Savior of all men, then "specially of those who believe" would make sense. We could then read it that God wants to be the Savior of all men, but some won't believe, so he's the Savior of only those who believe.

But the text doesn't say that. It says God IS the Savior of all men.

That being the case, then "Savior" of all men must have a different application from salvation as we understand it. The question to answer is, in what sense is God the Savior of all men?

Rev. John Sampson summarizes it this way:
So, this verse cannot be used as a proof text that we can say "Jesus died for you," or "Jesus loves you."

True, I am not a universalist.

My own answer would be in the word "specially".

I can't prove it but since the word being used is malista the adverb superlative of mala it is IMO the koine equivalent of "specifically" of which our God is doing the saving (or that is to say "of those who have been saved, He is the only possible Savior of those having been brought into the household of God

or - who is the Saviour of all men, specifically of those that believe.

If Paul had written that God wants to be the Savior of all men, then "specially of those who believe" would make sense. We could then read it that God wants to be the Savior of all men, but some won't believe, so he's the Savior of only those who believe.

IMO - Weak, very weak... Why? Because what God wants, God ultimately gets. Actually, this argument seems better suited for the non-cal view but prsents a difficulty for either side.

To be honest, I don't particularly like my own answer either.

Universalism however has such a force of Scripture against it there must be some other explanation. Perhaps it's a matter of nuance.

Thanks
HankD

 

[Winman]

You're making my point, that for some, believing is impossible.

Not at all. Why would God need to "give them up" if they cannot believe? This implies an act of judgment for their rebellion, but it also implies God could influence them to believe.

But I had another point in mind, actually two points.

The first is that if God chooses based on foreseen faith (which he doesn't), then only those whose faith he foresees will choose. Their destinies are fixed. It is not possible that someone whom God foresees will not have faith, will ever have faith, nor can they.

This is circular. Yes, God can only see those who believe, but this does not mean the others could not believe. Their fates were not fixed, they had choice.

The second point is that for those who have never heard the Gospel, they also cannot choose faith. They do not know about Jesus, his death, burial and resurrection and the atonement. They cannot choose someone of whom they know little or nothing.

Unless one is prepared to argue that every person everywhere for the past 2,000 years has heard the gospel, then all can't always mean all.

This is one of those questions no one seems able to answer, but it does not support your doctrine, because it would show election to be conditioned upon where a person lives, or what time they lived, or what people they were.

I mean, if an ancient civilization that lived in the Americas never heard the gospel, a person would have to ask why God chose not to elect any of these people? It would appear that God was partial. This is not unconditional.

Why does God elect millions in western countries, but very small numbers in the Middle East or Asia in proportion to the population? Does God prefer Europeans and Americans over Saudi's or Chinese?

 

[preacher4truth]

Maybe somebody can help me out.

Find for me a verse in the New Testament where any believer said to a lost person, "Jesus loves you and died for you."

People believe what you say here is the Gospel. It's not even close. The way persons were saved is by belief in the Gospel.

You're correct Tom in what you ask and say.

Many on this site and in churches are clueless to what the Gospel is. If you don't know what the Gospel is, and yet it is and eternally remains the means with which we are saved, how can one be if said doesn't even know what it is?

 

[Winman]

Maybe somebody can help me out.

Find for me a verse in the New Testament where any believer said to a lost person, "Jesus loves you and died for you."

I can deliver half of your request.

Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

As far as we know this young rich ruler was lost. He certainly was not willing to give up his riches and trust Christ at this time, but verse 21 says Jesus loved him.

Edit- Here is another famous verse that shows Jesus loves lost persons.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Did God commend his love towards us after we were saved? No, he commended his love toward us while we were "yet" sinners. And it also says Jesus died for us while we were "yet" sinners. So, I have answered your request in full.