How the 5 points of Calvinism don’t line up.

[Yeshua1]

The blood justifies. Salvation in time is the effect.

No eternal Justification, as all saved must receive it still now!

 

[1689Dave]

No eternal Justification, as all saved must receive it still now!

You are making a false claim not knowing what scripture says.

 

[Yeshua1]

You are making a false claim not knowing what scripture says.

You believe that the elect are saved regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord?

 

[Mikey]

This is true, but the blood saves, faith is a side effect.

The atonement saves. Even if you never hear the gospel. The Westminster agrees to this). But the rest follows under normal conditions.

Can you expound on this?

 

[1689Dave]

Can you expound on this?

Let me ask, what do you think saves a person?

 

[atpollard]

You believe that the elect are saved regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord?

You are describing a "married bachelor" ... something that cannot exist because it is a self-contradiction.

The elect are the elect because they are chosen by the Father to be saved through and in the Son. So being "elect" means that the Father has given you to the Son, who gives you eternal life. That is true whether you confess on your deathbed or die at 3 days old.

 

[Mikey]

Let me ask, what do you think saves a person?

By Grace Alone, through Faith Alone, in Christ Alone

 

[1689Dave]

By Grace Alone, through Faith Alone, in Christ Alone

But all of that follows justification in the atonement. And it is not you implementing it. It is "God producing it in the elect when helplessly lost.

 

[Yeshua1]

You are describing a "married bachelor" ... something that cannot exist because it is a self-contradiction.

The elect are the elect because they are chosen by the Father to be saved through and in the Son. So being "elect" means that the Father has given you to the Son, who gives you eternal life. That is true whether you confess on your deathbed or die at 3 days old.

yes, but eternal Justification teaches that regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord while living, shall be saved due to being one of His own!

 

[atpollard]

yes, but eternal Justification teaches that regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord while living, shall be saved due to being one of His own!

Is Moses saved?
Was Moses saved because he saw Jesus at the mount of Transfiguration, or before that?

Somehow, never meeting Jesus face to face in life does not seem to have been an issue for God during the OT. God dealt with it. I do not believe that God saved them without Jesus as Lord, but I think that God was not stripped of his power to save by times and circumstances.

As for a hypothetical person who dies before receiving Jesus but should have ... who am I to tell God what is possible or impossible for Him. God said He chooses (so I believe Him). God said Jesus is the only door to the Father (so I believe Him). God saved the OT saints before they met Jesus (so apparently He can). [shrug]

 

[Alan Gross]

The atonement saves. Even if you never hear the gospel. The Westminster agrees to this). But the rest follows under normal conditions.

Nope, on the 'atonement saves'.

Negative on "Even if you never hear the gospel",

Not relevant, one way or the other: "The Westminster agrees to this" (whether it does or not).

...

The is 'Hardshellism', correct? That's what it always has been.

And something you are proud of, right?, or religiously shammed over?, because that's all it is.

100% denial of a couple of dozen Good Doctrines and Jesus' Atonement.

There must be a Scripture or two that can be warped out of the weakness of the flesh and influence of Satan that tempts someone to hang onto "Don't tell ANYONE JESUS is The SAVIOR".

Who cares what they are?

If there is no conversion experience, there is no testimony of Salvation.

This is "another gospel" and they shouldn't feel THAT bad about it, there are hundreds of various "false gospels".

This one just happens to be, "The gospel is not important; look at me, I didn't need it".

...

I hate these Evil works.

 

[Alan Gross]

yes, but eternal Justification teaches that regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord while living, shall be saved due to being one of His own!

nooooooooooooouuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

 

[George Antonios]

You believe that the elect are saved regardless if they receive Jesus as Lord?

Brother, you need to wake up and smell the kool-aid.

What he is saying is the logical end point of Calvinism.

They don't need to receive Christ because they are already elect before receiving him.

You just haven't followed your Calvinism all the way through yet.

Vigorously deny to yourself what I just said, just do me a favour and remember it some time down the line.

 

[Yeshua1]

Brother, you need to wake up and smell the kool-aid.

What he is saying is the logical end point of Calvinism.

They don't need to receive Christ because they are already elect before receiving him.

You just haven't followed your Calvinism all the way through yet.

Vigorously deny to yourself what I just said, just do me a favour and remember it some time down the line.

That position would be Hyper Calvinism, and is wrong theology!

 

[Yeshua1]

Is Moses saved?
Was Moses saved because he saw Jesus at the mount of Transfiguration, or before that?

Somehow, never meeting Jesus face to face in life does not seem to have been an issue for God during the OT. God dealt with it. I do not believe that God saved them without Jesus as Lord, but I think that God was not stripped of his power to save by times and circumstances.

As for a hypothetical person who dies before receiving Jesus but should have ... who am I to tell God what is possible or impossible for Him. God said He chooses (so I believe Him). God said Jesus is the only door to the Father (so I believe Him). God saved the OT saints before they met Jesus (so apparently He can). [shrug]

I am referring to those born after time of Jesus, as those now under the new Covenant between God and mankind!

 

[The Archangel]

The atonement saves. Even if you never hear the gospel.

I can't agree to this (not that you need me to...). Romans 10 asks, "How will they hear without a preacher?" and the implied answer by the Greek is "They won't."

What you are describing here is, essentially, a square circle. If Christ has died for someone, God will see to it that the gospel gets to them.

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

Brother, you need to wake up and smell the kool-aid.

What he is saying is the logical end point of Calvinism.

They don't need to receive Christ because they are already elect before receiving him.

You just haven't followed your Calvinism all the way through yet.

Vigorously deny to yourself what I just said, just do me a favour and remember it some time down the line.

Fact Check: The information in this post is false.

The Archangel

 

[Sai]

I can't agree to this (not that you need me to...). Romans 10 asks, "How will they hear without a preacher?" and the implied answer by the Greek is "They won't."

What you are describing here is, essentially, a square circle. If Christ has died for someone, God will see to it that the gospel gets to them.

The Archangel

He died for all.

 

[Sai]

How the 5 points of Calvinism don’t line up.

The 5 points lined up originally since Calvin taught universal atonement. This made faith and the word the means of salvation.

But Dort. Removed universal atonement and made Christ’s shed blood, limited to the elect, the means of salvation. This means the blood saves from eternity, even infants, and those elect beyond the reach of the gospel.

It is true the gospel saves us from ourselves and others in time. But the blood of Christ secured our salvation in eternity.

We notice the fruit of the Spirit in Cornelius, Lydia, and others long before hearing about Christ.

But point 4 “effectual calling” still tries to use the old logic that faith and the word are the means of salvation.

Point 4 should read something like “all redeemed by Christ from eternity will be born-again at any time of life and manifest the fruits of the Spirit. They will also believe in Christ through the gospel when exposed. This explains how many OT saints including Abel were saved centuries before the gospel.

Sounds like Dort was afraid of the natives and came up with this weak idea of limited atonement for fear of head shrinking.

 

[Barry Johnson]

I think that is a good observation about Lydia and the Centurion.

I would point out that it has ALWAYS been so. God has always been folding "gentiles" into His chosen people.

• Abram was CHOSEN ... and left with many servants (folded into the chosen people).
• Jacob was CHOSEN ... and had twelve children from two women and two foreign servants (gentiles folded into the chosen people)
• Joseph was one of the twelve tribes and became TWO half tribes through Egyptian wives (gentiles folded into the chosen people)
• Rahab was a gentile CHOSEN by God to be folded into the chosen people.
• Ruth was a gentile CHOSEN by God to be folded into the chosen people and be the grandmother to David.

God has always had two flocks and God has forever been folding them together.
Jesus just made explicit what God had been doing implicitly all along.

Chosen for what ? Chosen to do what?