Provisionalism vs Calvinism

[OldArmy]

that all humans are corrupt by nature and, apart from grace, all humans receive the just judgment due. Call this just and righteous judgment whatever you wish and note that all humanity would be predestined to God's wrath, except for the gracious pardon of God, which God determined before the foundation of the world.

I agree with that statement, but...that last bit about before the foundation of the world I'd nuance probably differently than I'm assuming you mean it.

Question: why bother with even creating creation if you mean it the way I'm assuming you might. Which is the elect, effectual rejuvenation etc.

 

[OldArmy]

@OldArmy
A few questions, if you don't mind my curiosity:
Where in Scripture, do you see "free agency" declared By God?

I'm not speaking about God doing his part to fulfill His covenant with Israel...I'm referring to God declaring that all men are "free agents".
Is that view based on implication, or declaration?

In other words, where does Scripture state ( essentially ), " Mankind is free to choose salvation"?
I can show you where it states that mankind hates Jesus Christ and will not come to Him, and that there is none that seeks God.

But I cannot show you where God declares that men are free to either choose to accept Christ or choose not to.
To me, that is an assumption.

Where in Scripture do you see that the atonement has to be applied to someone ( as if it hasn't already been applied and is "waiting" )?

I see where it was definitely applied, but nowhere do I see that it resides somewhere, waiting to be applied when we believe, for example.

It is sufficient.

While I believe the bolded part, I do not see you showing Scripture that states when His blood was applied to the believer.
Then there's the problem of who Christ died for, and what that death accomplished.

Similar to the above point, where do you see His word developing when His blood is / was applied?

I personally know of some Calvinists who are unable to think and reason with Scripture outside of what they have been taught by other men.
I also know of some "Calvinists" who can actually understand Scripture outside of what they were taught from pulpits.

Do you lump them all together as one?
I hope not.

My real question:
Why do you think that "Calvinists" have a problem with what Scripture actually says?

I have no trouble seeing what this says, for example:

" But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." ( John 10:26 ).
" But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you." ( John 10:26, NKJV )

I agree with the first part.
Where do you see Scripture that states that God wants all men to choose Him?

Neither did I, roughly 16 years ago.

Where is that declared in God's word?

I see Scripture that states that we already have rejected Him, and do so perpetually ( Romans 1:18-32, Romans 3:10-18, John 3:19-20, Psalms 10:4 ), but I do not see clear statements that He allows men to reject Him and suffer the consequences while He somehow waits for us to choose Him.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

I don't think 5 point Calvanists have a problem with what scripture says, I just think they misunderstand it.

There are "Calvinist" that do have a problem with the 5 point understandings though and only claim 3 points or 4 points, personally I think it's a cop out though.

 

[Particular]

I don't think 5 point Calvanists have a problem with what scripture says, I just think they misunderstand it.

There are "Calvinist" that do have a problem with the 5 point understandings though and only claim 3 points or 4 points, personally I think it's a cop out though.

The points all function together. You cannot take one or two points away and still associate yourself with Calvin's exegesis of scripture.

 

[Particular]

I agree with that statement, but...that last bit about before the foundation of the world I'd nuance probably differently than I'm assuming you mean it.

Question: why bother with even creating creation if you mean it the way I'm assuming you might. Which is the elect, effectual rejuvenation etc.

There is no good answer to your question as God does not tell us the "why" in his plan. God only tells us some of the "for this purpose."
For what purpose did God ordain the entrance of rebellion into His creation? I don't know. What I know is that God had His promised one already ordained as He promises Adam and Eve that a Redeemer would come.

 

[OldArmy]

The points all function together. You cannot take one or two points away and still associate yourself with Calvin's exegesis of scripture.

And yet many "Calvinist" claim to only be a 4 point Calvinist. I agree with your assessment though, which is why I say they're being cop outs. I personally think they are just sticking their head in the sand. Wonder why...

 

[OldArmy]

There is no good answer to your question as God does not tell us the "why" in his plan. God only tells us some of the "for this purpose."
For what purpose did God ordain the entrance of rebellion into His creation? I don't know. What I know is that God had His promised one already ordained as He promises Adam and Eve that a Redeemer would come.

Just a guess, but could it all be so we would have an honest choice? (And I really mean that, not being sarcastic)

Adam and Eve didn't know what sin was, the word had no meaning to them as they hadn't ate yet from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They were still innocent right up until they ate. Which on a side note is where R.C Sproul misses something obvious in his whole "from whence does sin come" because he's looking at things that Adam did prior to eating of the tree that would have been counted as sin, had he not still been innocent. You know, because he hadn't eaten of it yet!

And don't assume by asking of the question I'm suggesting man can somehow over write God's sovereignty. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying His will is for us to choose. Does God know who will and won't choose Him? Ofcourse He does! But He still allows the choice to be made. Otherwise it wouldn't be a real honest choice.

 

[Dave G]

I don't think 5 point Calvanists have a problem with what scripture says, I just think they misunderstand it.

I have the same opinion about "Traditionalists", as well as "Wesleyans" and many others...although I truly hope that, through careful study, they will come to fully understand His word and its many truths contained in it.

Just a guess, but could it all be so we would have an honest choice?

No, the "honest choice" is what got us all into trouble.
That honest choice was like candy...and we fell in love with it.

Read Romans 1 carefully.
It's not pretty.

Adam and Eve didn't know what sin was, the word had no meaning to them as they hadn't ate yet from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

I agree.

But God told them what would happen if they ate of it.
Then when they did, they knew that they had done wrong.

Now here's where I think it gets real interesting...why didn't they both fall on their faces and beg God's forgiveness, instead of "playing the blame game"?

Which on a side note is where R.C Sproul misses something obvious in his whole "from whence does sin come" because he's looking at things that Adam did prior to eating of the tree that would have been counted as sin, had he not still been innocent. You know, because he hadn't eaten of it yet!

What does R.C. Sproul have to do with Scripture?

I'm saying His will is for us to choose.

Where's that at, in God's word?

Does God know who will and won't choose Him?

Yes, He does...no one ( Romans 3:10-18, Psalms 10:4 ).

But He still allows the choice to be made. Otherwise it wouldn't be a real honest choice.

Man's honest choice was already made, and is being made day after day.
We hate God and love sin ( John 3:19-20 )...honestly.

Without God to change the heart, there would be no choice other than to honestly reject Him and go the opposite direction.

 

[Particular]

Just a guess, but could it all be so we would have an honest choice?

Adam and Eve didn't know what sin was, the word had no meaning to them as they hadn't ate yet from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They were still innocent right up until they ate. Which on a side note is where R.C Sproul misses something obvious in his whole "from whence does sin come" because he's looking at things that Adam did prior to eating of the tree that would have been counted as sin, had he not still been innocent. You know, because he hadn't eaten of it yet!

I don't think it was about honest choice. God always chooses in scripture.
God chose mercy with Adam and Eve. He chose Abel's sacrifice. He chose Noah and Noah's family. He chose Abram. He chose Isaac, not Ishmael. He chose Jacob, not Esau. He chose Joseph. He chose Moses. He chose Joshua. He chose each Judge. He chose David. He chose the Prophets. He chose to enter earth as a man. He chose Apostles. He chose. It is one of the grand themes of God's revelation to man. God the Creator chooses what He is doing, like a brilliant artist. Nothing is haphazard. Nothing is out of place.

 

[MartyF]

I really can't summarize 4 hours of material and do it any justice.

Really? Flowers is not scripture. You can at least bookmark the pertinent sections like people do with scripture.

 

[Iconoclast]

OldArmy,

Thank you for taking the time for that lengthy reply, but from where I'm standing that's not the refutation you probably think it is. You stood on Calvinism, I already understand what it purports and reject it.

You took the time to post, that told me you are sincere. We are both studying and learning.
I was not so much refuting, but probing a bit for clarification.

But can you begin to even see my perspective?[/QUOTE]

I try to understand what a person posts, and why they post it. Then I see where we agree. Then why we do not agree.

Or do you just dismiss it and default to what you were taught the scriptures mean rather than examining what they say. Btw, I'm not claiming to perfectly understand all scripture I most certainly don't and I'd be extremely suspicious of anyone who did.

I think you did a reasonable job, better than most to post your belief. I can respect that and am glad you have searched out what you have. In time we will zero in more, maybe provide food for thought.

Perhaps the reason some believe and others don't is under our noses in scripture with the parable of the sower.

In some cases sadly that is true. In others God has revealed or concealed truth at that time to the person.

But if you think any young child that dies goes to Him, (duno if you do, I do) then that would seem to suggest to me anyway we all start as "good" soil able to recieve the word and believe. (I did not mean that good as in worthy or anything like that so please don't go down that road, I simply meant like in context to the parable)

I believe the confession of faith handles this perfectly, by leaving it in Gods hand 100%
from the 1689;
3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

Also as for the Kings/ authority comment maybe I just suck at English but I read that and to me it seems to stress it as if to say "even kings".

I can only offer what I have found, as you have to me. If we both want truth ,it is not about "winning a point, but rather growing in grace or knowledge..Thanks for your post.

 

[Iconoclast]

And yet many "Calvinist" claim to only be a 4 point Calvinist. I agree with your assessment though, which is why I say they're being cop outs. I personally think they are just sticking their head in the sand. Wonder why...

again...every believer is really a Calvinist, but it takes time for some of the pieces to fall in place.

 

[OldArmy]

Deuteronomy 30:15-20.

How does a Calvinist read that?

 

[Reformed]

Deuteronomy 30:15-20 is a covenant promise to Israel. It is in keeping with the blessing and cursing of the Law found two chapters earlier in Deuteronomy 28. Moses' charge to the nation of Israel was ultimately fulfilled when the kingdom split and both factions were eventually conquered. There is a general principle we can apply from living a life of obedience or disobedience, but the conditions specified in Moses' charge were to the covenant nation of Israel, which no longer exists.

 

[OldArmy]

Deuteronomy 30:15-20 is a covenant promise to Israel. It is in keeping with the blessing and cursing of the Law found two chapters earlier in Deuteronomy 28. Moses' charge to the nation of Israel was ultimately fulfilled when the kingdom split and both factions were eventually conquered. There is a general principle we can apply from living a life of obedience or disobedience, but the conditions specified in Moses' charge were to the covenant nation of Israel, which no longer exists.

(ESV)Deuteronomy 30:19 " I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,"

I agree with what you posted but you seem to have skipped right over what I was looking for comments on, verse 19.

 

[Reformed]

(ESV)Deuteronomy 30:19 " I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,"

I agree with what you posted but you seem to have skipped right over what I was looking for comments on, verse 19.

I did not skip over it. "It" is part of obedience to the Law. The promise to the covenant nation of Israel is that if obey you are blessed and if you not you are cursed.

 

[OldArmy]

I did not skip over it. "It" is part of obedience to the Law. The promise to the covenant nation of Israel is that if obey you are blessed and if you not you are cursed.

If?

 

[MB]

I did not skip over it. "It" is part of obedience to the Law. The promise to the covenant nation of Israel is that if obey you are blessed and if you not you are cursed.

Seems to me since the Jews could not keep the Law yet they were still blessed and cursed. In fact more than any other people on earth they are cursed yet blessed. Doesn't make any sense does it?
MB

 

[Particular]

Perhaps the 7 points of Provisionalism?

 

[Reformed]

If?

the "choose life" part.

 

[Dave G]

Seems to me since the Jews could not keep the Law yet they were still blessed and cursed. In fact more than any other people on earth they are cursed yet blessed. Doesn't make any sense does it?

It doesn't have to "make sense" to us.
But the reason they were blessed is because God chose them, as a nation:

" For thou [art] an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that [are] upon the face of the earth.
7 The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye [were] the fewest of all people:
8 but because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. " ( Deuteronomy 7:6-8 ).

God says it and we as believers...believe it.
Shouldn't we?
From my experience, it then begins to make sense over time as the Lord transforms our thinking through His word.

In addition, the Law has a purpose...

" Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith." ( Galatians 3:24 ).

"Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and [it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a [mediator] of one, but God is one.
21 [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." ( Galatians 3:19-22 ).

The Law served various purposes.
But for the believer in Christ Jesus, it has mainly one...

To condemn us and drive us to Christ as our only hope of reconciliation with God.