Hyper-Calvinism

[DaveXR650]

Dave, given that all Reformed teach that the vast majority of mankind cannot be saved because salvation depends first of all on the selection process of God before he created anything, it follows by logic and reason that the single most important doctrine for anyone personally is to have been in that group who were chosen of God to be saved. If salvation was a possibility for everyone to whom the evangelist preached, that would not be true.

You are a member of the Reformed. If, given the choice, you could choose between being in the number of the elected before the foundation of the world or depend solely upon the testimony of God that he would save the soul of anyone who would come to him in simple faith, believing that Jesus Christ has indeed satified the penalty for your personal sins, which is the second death in the lake of fire, which would you choose?

Your answer should tell us what is the most important doctine to you.

I'm not trying to make you into a Calvinist but I am refuting your statement that there is nothing in common. It was John Owen, a high Calvinist, who said that he had it on authority of scripture that anyone who comes to Christ will be saved. He is also on record, and I have the reference if you need it, that Christ can do nothing for you if you don't believe. So how can you say there is no common doctrine?

As for me personally, I do not believe in a "limited" atonement. In addition, while I do believe that men on their own are incapable of really coming to Christ without the aid of the Holy Spirit I do think that this grace can be resisted. But there again, Owen has a whole chapter warning us not to resist the calling of the Holy Spirit lest the call cease and leave you helpless and lost. Sounds a lot like my old Baptist preachers.

My only point to you would be that there is a lot more in common with Calvinism than you may think. That book I mentioned, edited by one of the most anti-Calvinist guys I know, goes into the similarities quite well and it is worth a look. As a Baptist, we have a lot in common with Calvinism as a theology. In practice, most truly "Reformed" won't accept a Baptist as really reformed because we don't do covenant theology like they do, which will include infant baptism, and we don't have the same beliefs on the meaning of the Lord's supper, or the same Church organization. But we have a lot in common.

 

[JesusFan]

I'm not trying to make you into a Calvinist but I am refuting your statement that there is nothing in common. It was John Owen, a high Calvinist, who said that he had it on authority of scripture that anyone who comes to Christ will be saved. He is also on record, and I have the reference if you need it, that Christ can do nothing for you if you don't believe. So how can you say there is no common doctrine?

As for me personally, I do not believe in a "limited" atonement. In addition, while I do believe that men on their own are incapable of really coming to Christ without the aid of the Holy Spirit I do think that this grace can be resisted. But there again, Owen has a whole chapter warning us not to resist the calling of the Holy Spirit lest the call cease and leave you helpless and lost. Sounds a lot like my old Baptist preachers.

My only point to you would be that there is a lot more in common with Calvinism than you may think. That book I mentioned, edited by one of the most anti-Calvinist guys I know, goes into the similarities quite well and it is worth a look. As a Baptist, we have a lot in common with Calvinism as a theology. In practice, most truly "Reformed" won't accept a Baptist as really reformed because we don't do covenant theology like they do, which will include infant baptism, and we don't have the same beliefs on the meaning of the Lord's supper, or the same Church organization. But we have a lot in common.

I am a Reformed Baptist, and would say much more in line with say a Dr MacArthur then a Presbartarian fellow calvinistist!

 

[JD731]

How can a spiritually dead in sin nature be able to by themselves now will themselves to come to Lord Jesus to be their savior, as their sin nature itself will be in rebellion against God and reject Him to save them from their sins?

You are highlighting uncommon doctrines of the presentation of the Christian faith. Nobody using logic and common sense and faith in the testimony of God believes such a thing as that because God does not say that.

There is no such thing as a sin nature. There is only a natural man and the provision of God through Christ is to make natural men to be spiritual men by a new birth through faith in Jesus Christ, who made it possible for all natural men.

 

[JD731]

I'm not trying to make you into a Calvinist but I am refuting your statement that there is nothing in common. It was John Owen, a high Calvinist, who said that he had it on authority of scripture that anyone who comes to Christ will be saved. He is also on record, and I have the reference if you need it, that Christ can do nothing for you if you don't believe. So how can you say there is no common doctrine?

As for me personally, I do not believe in a "limited" atonement. In addition, while I do believe that men on their own are incapable of really coming to Christ without the aid of the Holy Spirit I do think that this grace can be resisted. But there again, Owen has a whole chapter warning us not to resist the calling of the Holy Spirit lest the call cease and leave you helpless and lost. Sounds a lot like my old Baptist preachers.

My only point to you would be that there is a lot more in common with Calvinism than you may think. That book I mentioned, edited by one of the most anti-Calvinist guys I know, goes into the similarities quite well and it is worth a look. As a Baptist, we have a lot in common with Calvinism as a theology. In practice, most truly "Reformed" won't accept a Baptist as really reformed because we don't do covenant theology like they do, which will include infant baptism, and we don't have the same beliefs on the meaning of the Lord's supper, or the same Church organization. But we have a lot in common.

Will you go on record against the doctrine of election as taught by all Reformed and is understood as being a limited and restricted choice of God on whom he is willing to save by all of us who are aware of what Calvinists teach?

 

[DaveXR650]

Will you go on record against the doctrine of election as taught by all Reformed and is understood as being a limited and restricted choice of God on whom he is willing to save by all of us who are aware of what Calvinists teach?

If you are truly against the doctrine of election you are not within mainstream Baptists. What the great Calvinist confessions teach, Westminster and London Baptist 1689 is both election and the free will of people. What I do not believe is that God created millions of people with no other purpose in mind but to damn them to Hell. Some Calvinists actually believe and teach that and that I disagree with. But I do believe there is something called "election", it is sovereign, and I cannot resolve how this works with the operation of our free will, which is also real.

I go to a Baptist church that is not Calvinist but is not anti Calvinist either. Just the other night someone mentioned a person who we should pray for that God would "open their heart" to the gospel. What in the world is that if you believe in no Calvinistic doctrines? They heard the gospel, now they must decide, right? Wrong. We pray that God will powerfully influence them and frankly it doesn't bother me if someone prays that God enlighten or even regenerate them.

 

[JD731]

God has still ordained that the elect shall come to saving faith in the Lord Jesus per the preaching of the gospel, as we arte not falatist, as still must hear the good news, and still receive Jesus as Lord thru faith

It doesn't matter. The most important doctrine in Calvinism is not the cross of Jesus Christ, it is election with your name in the right column. It does not matter to the most of the human race that Jesus died and rose again if you are correct about this. His sacrifice does not, can not, impact them at all, by the decree of God. It is an awful doctrine and it is not a common doctrine among Christians but it is the fundamental doctrine of the Reformed.

 

[JesusFan]

You are highlighting uncommon doctrines of the presentation of the Christian faith. Nobody using logic and common sense and faith in the testimony of God believes such a thing as that because God does not say that.

There is no such thing as a sin nature. There is only a natural man and the provision of God through Christ is to make natural men to be spiritual men by a new birth through faith in Jesus Christ, who made it possible for all natural men.

You are making out Jesus and Paul to be liars here, as there are none righteous, all have sinned, and all have a sin nature from birth that resists God to save them if were left to their own device

 

[JesusFan]

Will you go on record against the doctrine of election as taught by all Reformed and is understood as being a limited and restricted choice of God on whom he is willing to save by all of us who are aware of what Calvinists teach?

Do you assert the non biblical doctrine of prevalent Grace and common grace then?

 

[Van]

@Van. From what I have read a hyper-Calvinist does indeed believe that God directly causes everything that happens down to the smallest detail. Some Calvinists also believe this with various modifying details of how this works in real life. But not all. It is indeed one thing that makes you a hyper-Calvinist. It is not the only thing and it doesn't matter if that is your only definition.

Are you trying to pin that one point on all Calvinists?

Here again is my question for discussion:

Does the Bible teach everything is predestined, or do we make choices that alter the outcome of our lives. ​

Thus I made no suggestion that Hyper-Calvinism is based solely on Exhaustive Determinism.

My position is that the Bible clearly teaches some things God predestines, and other things God does not predestine.






Quote Reply

Report

 

[Van]

SNIP
As I said, you don't understand. Read 1 Kings 22. God had decreed that Ahab should be killed at Ramoth Gilead. Despite being warned of this, Ahab still went feely into battle. A soldier fired off an arrow at random (there is no indication that he really wanted to fire it somewhere else, but God overruled him). The arrow this randomly fired just happened to strike Ahab exactly between the joints of his armour. Thus the free wills of both Ahab and the soldier resulted in exactly what God had decreed. SNIP

Once again, denial of the obvious! In the above snip, the implication is made that God causes something to happen somehow supports the idea God causes all things to happen. Utter nonsense. No need to continue this waste.

 

[Van]

Everything brought up on that posting was from the bible van

Yet another false claim with nothing cited in support. Discussion therefore is pointless.

 

[JD731]

If you are truly against the doctrine of election you are not within mainstream Baptists. What the great Calvinist confessions teach, Westminster and London Baptist 1689 is both election and the free will of people. What I do not believe is that God created millions of people with no other purpose in mind but to damn them to Hell. Some Calvinists actually believe and teach that and that I disagree with. But I do believe there is something called "election", it is sovereign, and I cannot resolve how this works with the operation of our free will, which is also real.

I go to a Baptist church that is not Calvinist but is not anti Calvinist either. Just the other night someone mentioned a person who we should pray for that God would "open their heart" to the gospel. What in the world is that if you believe in no Calvinistic doctrines? They heard the gospel, now they must decide, right? Wrong. We pray that God will powerfully influence them and frankly it doesn't bother me if someone prays that God enlighten or even regenerate them.

It seems as if your doctrine of election has God willing to change his mind in time of whom he will save, from what he has decreed in eternity, based on some circumstances like prayer to open the heart of the unelect and make them elect.

If what Paul said in Acts 17 to the Athenians is true, and we are all the offspring of God, then how can you reason that the choice of God to save just a few out of the many, with only two places to go in eternity, heaven or hell, is not actually his choice to send many to hell? That thinking seems to defy logic, if you ask me.

 

[Van]

It seems as if your doctrine of election has God willing to change his mind in time of whom he will save, from what he has decreed in eternity, based on some circumstances like prayer to open the heart of the unelect and make them elect.

If what Paul said in Acts 17 to the Athenians is true, and we are all the offspring of God, then how can you reason that the choice of God to save just a few out of the many, with only two places to go in eternity, heaven or hell, is not actually his choice to send many to hell? That thinking seems to defy logic, if you ask me.

This probably does not apply to all Exhaustive Determinists, but it seems many do engage in cognitive dissonance (defying logic).

But the reason for the post to to comment on your "prayer to open the heart..." A common belief is that the lost need to be enabled to hear, understand and fully embrace the gospel. That the fields are not "white for harvest." That a large segment of the lost are not "of My sheep" thus open (already) to the spiritual milk of God's word.

 

[JesusFan]

It doesn't matter. The most important doctrine in Calvinism is not the cross of Jesus Christ, it is election with your name in the right column. It does not matter to the most of the human race that Jesus died and rose again if you are correct about this. His sacrifice does not, can not, impact them at all, by the decree of God. It is an awful doctrine and it is not a common doctrine among Christians but it is the fundamental doctrine of the Reformed.

All of us are born into Adam are sinners by birth and choice, election does not mean that lost sinners are just tossed into hell and final judgement, but that we ail will choose that final state if left to our own "free will"

 

[JesusFan]

It seems as if your doctrine of election has God willing to change his mind in time of whom he will save, from what he has decreed in eternity, based on some circumstances like prayer to open the heart of the unelect and make them elect.

If what Paul said in Acts 17 to the Athenians is true, and we are all the offspring of God, then how can you reason that the choice of God to save just a few out of the many, with only two places to go in eternity, heaven or hell, is not actually his choice to send many to hell? That thinking seems to defy logic, if you ask me.

God never condemned any lost sinner to Hell, as they choose that by their own "free will", and God ordained that praying and proclamation of their Gospel are chosen means to get His own saved

 

[Van]

The idea is that to "open" another person's eyes, heart, mind is to simply explain the subject in a way the person can grasp and understand.

So a prayer to God might be to ask that we may study and learn and witness such that our testimony "opens" the lost person's understanding to the gospel of Christ.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Once again, denial of the obvious! In the above snip, the implication is made that God causes something to happen somehow supports the idea God causes all things to happen. Utter nonsense. No need to continue this waste.

Your inability to answer the points made is noted. I agree; no reason to continue.

 

[JD731]

You are making out Jesus and Paul to be liars here, as there are none righteous, all have sinned, and all have a sin nature from birth that resists God to save them if were left to their own device

God has said that none are righteous because of the simple fact that all sin, because they do not have power against sin, not because they are zombies. They are natural men, as their father, Adam, simply meaning they do not have the Spirit of God in their bodies. That is what the new birth does. It makes a man spiritual.

Pardon me while I prove what I preach from the scripture;

1 Cor 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

The image of God and of Christ is trinitarian. The new birth through faith in Christ gives us the third person of our being, the Holy Spirit to indwell us. The Spirit is not given to us because we are elected by God as his, but by believing in Christ. The triune God is involved in 3 different capacities of election. God is forming now in time the body of Christ as a corporate entity So, when a sinner believes the gospel, the Spirit is given to him as the gift of life to indwell individually and the Spirit at the same time baptizes the believer into the corporate body of Christ and God chooses him because he has chosen Christ before the foudation of the world. Men are chosen "in Christ."

Lest you think I am blowing smoke, that is clearly said about the gentiles here;

2 Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning (of this age) chosen you to salvation through sanctification (separation) of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Words have meaning and the Bible has context, men.

The same is said about the Jews in that time frame;

1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

Noone could be elect children of God without the new birth and no one could experience the new birth before the Spirit was sent to the earth and the Spirit cannot indwell men until there is an agent of cleansing the sin away, which is the blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ.

What wonders Christ has done for us.

 

[JD731]

All of us are born into Adam are sinners by birth and choice, election does not mean that lost sinners are just tossed into hell and final judgement, but that we ail will choose that final state if left to our own "free will"

Sinning has nothing to do with our free will. Sin corrupts because he is a sovereign king, if you want a biblical personification of sin.

Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death,

Take away the penalty and he can stll manifest himself but he can no longer reign unto death

 

[Van]

"No one could be elect children of God without the new birth and no one could experience the new birth before the Spirit was sent to the earth and the Spirit cannot indwell men until there is an agent of cleansing the sin away, which is the blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ.

1) I agree, now, post Christ's death on the cross, election for salvation is the transfer into Christ, the washing of regeneration (being made alive together with Christ) and after being made firm in Christ (born anew) indwelt with the Holy Spirit forever.

2) No one was born anew and indwelt until after Christ died on the cross. That is why the OT saints had to wait in "Abraham's bosom."

3) Your citation of 2 Thessalonians 2:13 is spot on! God chooses individuals for salvation by setting them apart spiritual in Christ, the sanctification by the Spirit, based o God alone crediting or not the person's "faith in the truth" as righteousness.