Revealed and Concealed Truth.

[Yeshua1]

The Word of God is the source of everything spiritual and faith is the prerequisite of understanding. Scripture speaks of spiritual truths – things that are not discerned intellectually via human wisdom but spiritually and to a greater extent as the believer moves towards a more mature position in Christ. Spiritual truth, these “deeper things of God”, are different from doctrines. Spiritual truths, the things the Spirit leads us into, are not words or speech but the result of these things. It is the difference between knowledge and wisdom.

Scripture gives us a few examples, probably the best known being the Spirit’s revelation to Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

(2 Corinthians 3; John 16; Isaiah 28; John 4; Matthew 16:16; 1 John 1:8-18; 1 John 4)

I say that to say this – be careful about people who tell you that God has led them to an interpretation of Scripture as “spiritual truth” or one that links the Spirit to a particular theology or understanding. They often mean well but ultimately rob God in their immaturity. It is easy for one to say God showed them “(fill in the blank) ism” as a spiritual truth and insist it a result of maturity. This is how the Deceiver works to sow discord.

Those who are mature in Christ know spiritual truth is not doctrine to be accepted but the Spirit’s use of God’s Word in the life of a believer. It does not matter if that person is a Calvinist or a free-will theologian. Spiritual truth is not merely Christian knowledge. I have seen too many people deceived into believing their understanding of Scripture (often Calvinism or SDA) to be spiritual truths. The problem is that they do not seek truth but knowledge and if they are saved they will never mature spiritually. They will always be the theology thumpers decrying all who disagree with their understanding, never understanding why Jesus commanded otherwise.

Some like to claim 1 John 2:20 to say that we can have all spiritual understanding now, or that our views are the right way to see things, but think John main thrust there was that we can know the real Jesus and have eternal life right here and now! His truth is that the Spirit is the One who allows us as redeemed to come into relationship with the true Christ!

 

[Yeshua1]

While I agree with most of your post I originally replied to, if you are stating that we cannot know and understand everything between the covers of God's word, then I have to politely disagree with you.

Believers in Jesus Christ have the unique privilege of having a book that was written to them and for them, by a God who loves them.
We can know and understand all that we may want to know about what is revealed to us from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21.
But that may take a long time.

However, Paul didn't tell Timothy not to study, so that he would be unable to rightly divide the word of truth ( 2 Timothy 2:15 ).
He told him the opposite.
So, just because we see Christ through a glass darkly ( 1 Corinthians 13:12 ), doesn't mean we cannot ultimately come to a confident and sound understanding of true doctrine.

Paul told Titus to speak the things that become ( resemble ) sound doctrine ( Titus 2:1 )...
And you can be sure that they both knew what that was.

None of us are Apostles, so none of us here will have perfect theology!

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree that anyone who argues against "what is written" is arguing against Truth. They are arguing against God.

I also will defend historic pre-mil as being true, but I will not elevate that belief to the level of Scripture. I can't because that would be elevating myself to the place of God. I know why I believe it accurate, but I can also discern the difference between the view and the text of Scripture.

At one time I strongly defended Calvinism (to my discredit on the level of Scripture). We learn from our mistakes, I suppose, and I absolutely have no issue about having held the position. My sin was how I held Calvinism (not as my understanding but on par with God's Word). God has used the experience to teach me, and I try to be as careful as possible to distinguish between knowledge, wisdom and spiritual truth as I strive to know where Scripture ends and my theology begins.

God has not yet given to any of us all of the understanding of all doctrines in scriptures, as He has seen fit to have open ended areas such as Eschatology for example!

 

[Yeshua1]

To give an example - @Dave Gilbert could be correct about Calvinism. I believe he is wrong, but I am not his judge and am not here to change his mind. Dave is a brother in Christ and I want for him and I to understand one another's positions - not try to change one another.

As a Calvinist Dave sees things in Scripture a specific way. I have a bit of a benefit in that I was for a long time a Calvinist as well, so I understand his position. I see false charges levied at his theology and understand why they are false charges. My hope would be that Dave would be able to understand my view, NOT that he would come over to my "side" but that he could evaluate my position and give honest feedback.

Understanding one another prevents people from talking past one another.

Dave may be more spiritually mature than I. But it is not because he is a Calvinist. Spiritual truth is not along the lines of human knowledge (it is not accepting one theology over another) but it is spiritual truths revealed by the Holy Spirit through the Word of God (through what is written) and is spiritual in nature, having a spiritual effect and realization on the believer.

There are things in the scriptures that can be more open ended then others, as I see Calvinism as in Sotierology spot on, bujt cannot say with say with same certainty Eshatology for example.

 

[Van]

Yet another thread, posted by a Calvinist, pushing Calvinist doctrine, but not consigned to the Cal/Arm forum.
Once again we see the false claim the Fall resulted in "total spiritual inability." Nope, Timothy was able to know the scriptures from infancy, so he had some limited spiritual ability. The "Law" acts as a tutor (or guide) to lead the lost to Christ, therefore the fallen have some limited spiritual ability.Thus some revealed truth from God can be discerned from His special revelation, His word.

 

[Iconoclast]

The OP. Used no such terms.
Try and interact with the topic.

 

[Van]

Post 25 interacts with the topic, It says the lost have limited spiritual ability, thus their "spiritual sight" is not completely dysfunctional. Post 26, OTOH does not address the topic, However, many "frivolous, and trifling, and uncharitable things" were said.

 

[Dave G]

None of us are Apostles, so none of us here will have perfect theology!

Dave,
Where did you ever get the idea that the apostles were any better than the least of God's saints?

Reading the Scriptures, I clearly see where both Peter and Paul made colossal mistakes, and showed that they are mere men like the rest of us....
But for the Spirit of God working through them.

Also, where did you ever get the idea that only apostles could understand the Bible?
If you don't mind my asking, did some man teach you that, or was it a church?

I know that the Roman Catholic Church stands on such principles, but I never thought I'd see or hear a Baptist claim that Scripture cannot be confidently studied and understood by all of God's people.

 

[Dave G]

Yet another thread, posted by a Calvinist, pushing Calvinist doctrine, but not consigned to the Cal/Arm forum.

Yet another thread by a professing Christian that others seem to think should be consigned to a dark corner, because of the frank discussion of subject matter.

Once again we see the false claim the Fall resulted in "total spiritual inability."

Once again we see Van's opinion of what he objects to, and again, it's accepted because this forum does not differentiate between "Baptists" of all stripes...
Who historically have held "Calvinistic" beliefs and teachings since long before any of us were ever born.

Nope, Timothy was able to know the scriptures from infancy, so he had some limited spiritual ability. The "Law" acts as a tutor (or guide) to lead the lost to Christ, therefore the fallen have some limited spiritual ability.Thus some revealed truth from God can be discerned from His special revelation, His word.

Timothy knew the Scriptures because his mother was a Jew ( and was also a believer in Christ ), and his father was a "Greek" ( Gentile ) ( Acts of the Apostles 16:1-5 ).
All Jews were instructed in the Law and prophets, as anyone under the Law of Moses was.

Thereby demonstrating his exposure to them from a child ( 2 Timothy 3:15 ).
But based on Scripture itself, God's word can only be truly understood by people to whom it has been given to ( Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11-12, Luke 8:10, Luke 24:45, John 8:43-47, 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 2:14-16, 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 ).

The Law acts as a tutor to lead sinners to Christ ( Galatians 3:24 )...but unless someone has "ears to hear" ( Matthew 11:27, Revelation 3:6, etc. ) they will not hear the words of God as anything other than foolishness ( read John 8:43-47 carefully, perhaps you will come to see this as I have ).
Ever wonder why when you quote Scripture or preach the Gospel to people, that it simply "bounces off" ( I've actually seen it happen )?

Now you know.

God's word answers that question, Van...
It is not silent on the matter.

May God bless you sir, in many ways.

 

[Iconoclast]

Yet another thread by a professing Christian that others seem to think should be consigned to a dark corner, because of the frank discussion of subject matter.

Once again we see Van's opinion of what he objects to, and again, it's accepted because this forum does not differentiate between "Baptists" of all stripes...
Who historically have held "Calvinistic" beliefs and teachings since long before any of us were ever born.

Timothy knew the Scriptures because his mother was a Jew ( and was also a believer in Christ ), and his father was a "Greek" ( Gentile ) ( Acts of the Apostles 16:1-5 ).
All Jews were instructed in the Law and prophets, as anyone under the Law of Moses was.

Thereby demonstrating his exposure to them from a child ( 2 Timothy 3:15 ).
But based on Scripture itself, God's word can only be truly understood by people to whom it has been given to ( Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11-12, Luke 8:10, Luke 24:45, John 8:43-47, 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 2:14-16, 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 ).

The Law acts as a tutor to lead sinners to Christ...but unless someone has "ears to hear", they will not hear the words of God as anything other than foolishness.
Ever wonder why when you quote Scripture or preach the Gospel to people, that it simply "bounces off" ( I've actually seen it happen )?

Now you know.

God's word answers that question, Van...
It is not silent on the matter.

May God bless you sir, in many ways.

The objections come from all directions.
Now imagine if a person said;
I have an advantage, I used to believe in the trinity but no longer.
Or,
I used to believe scripture is the word of God written, but not today.
Would you have confidence that you were going to hear something solid?
Everyone who digs up an idea, or philosophy, is not automatically offering anything solid, or valid.

 

[JonC]

The objections come from all directions.
Now imagine if a person said;
I have an advantage, I used to believe in the trinity but no longer.
Or,
I used to believe scripture is the word of God written, but not today.
Would you have confidence that you were going to hear something solid?
Everyone who digs up an idea, or philosophy, is not automatically offering anything solid, or valid.

You bring up philosophy, and you are correct. This is part of the differences in interpretation. Calvinism is based on a judicial philosophy not all share so they will never affirm Calvinism (not a spiritual issue but a difference concerning judicial philosophy at the core of Calvinism).

But it can also be a difference in human reasoning. Some share Calvin's philosophy in terms of justice but arrive at different conclusions on down the line (e.g., Arminianism, Amyraldianism). It could be a philosophical difference in matters of the will influencing interpretation. Or perhaps simple interpretive differences.

The bottom line is that what makes Calvinism has nothing to do with spiritual truth except that spiritual truth that is common and accessible to all believers regardless of soteriological positions.

 

[Iconoclast]

In Acts8 we have the account of Philip being directed to help the Eunuch.

He asks for help.Philip exegetes Isa53.
Notice;
He does not say...hold on, let me tell you about the moral influence theory, or the ransom theory , or let me explain my ideas of judicial philosophy.
No he preached Jesus right from the text.

 

[JonC]

In Acts8 we have the account of Philip being directed to help the Eunuch.

He asks for help.Philip exegetes Isa53.
Notice;
He does not say...hold on, let me tell you about the moral influence theory, or the ransom theory , or let me explain my ideas of judicial philosophy.
No he preached Jesus right from the text.

Exactly. Now you are getting it. He did not even mention Calvinism none of that philosophy. He stuck with the Word of God and the events of the New Testament.

 

[Iconoclast]

"Iconoclast,



A. Eyes to See

Because of what transpired in Eden, human beings must be enabled to “see what is not seen” and to “hear what is not heard.” When we look at a flower our sense is that we are seeing the flower itself, but really our brains are simply presenting to our consciousness electro-chemical data processed from a broad array of signals that originated with light striking cells on the back of our eyes. We “see” only the things that reflect light within the energy spectrum that these specialized cells are responsive to. Higher and lower energy levels are not detected, not because they don’t exist, but because they exist outside

This truth has crucial spiritual implications: As it is in the natural realm, spiritual realities are “real” for us only when they are perceptible. But our spiritual faculties have become impaired; just as damaged eyes are unable to properly receive and process energy within the visible spectrum, so fallen man cannot properly receive and process the spiritual “data” that is everpresent and constantly presses itself upon his mind and soul. Like Elisha’s servant and Christ’s hearers, we have to be given eyes to see and ears to hear (cf. 2 Kings 6:1-17; John 10:22-27).

With respect to the mere existence of the divine, the Bible and the human soul are in agreement. Being created in God’s image, people are unable to escape their innate awareness of spiritual realities. This is reflected in mankind’s ubiquitous and irrepressible religiosity. All people are religious, though the way individuals and groups conceive religious “truth” and construct religious frameworks differs greatly. (Even the atheist is religious in that he interacts with and reaches conclusions regarding the notions of deity and spiritual reality.)

Kit Culver notes
[/QUOTE]
In the OP. Pastor Culver gave a good explanation as to why men are religious and spiritually blind at the same time. Damage to as occurred that only God can fix

 

[Dave G]

Calvinism is based on a judicial philosophy not all share so they will never affirm Calvinism (not a spiritual issue but a difference concerning judicial philosophy at the core of Calvinism).

Strange.
I never considered what I understand regarding the Scriptures to be based on man-made philosophy, Jon.

In fact, I got my belief strictly from reading God's word.
I didn't need to bring any ideas of judicial philosophy into it, but read it out of it.

But it can also be a difference in human reasoning. Some share Calvin's philosophy in terms of justice but arrive at different conclusions on down the line (e.g., Arminianism, Amyraldianism). It could be a philosophical difference in matters of the will influencing interpretation. Or perhaps simple interpretive differences.

I disagree.

Some people, when they read Scripture for themsleves, see certain passages as directing the reader to do something to be saved.
Others see significant statements and understand that it is not what we do, but what God does first, and then we react in faith and belief.

The difference is either co-operation with God, or God operating, and the objects of that operation then reacting to the work of the Holy Spirit.

The bottom line is that what makes Calvinism has nothing to do with spiritual truth except that spiritual truth that is common and accessible to all believers regardless of soteriological positions.

Again, and I respectfully have to disagree.

I'm not "ecumenical", in that "all roads lead to Christ", Jon.
There is only one faith, one baptism, and one Gospel, as well as one Christ and a significant number of false ones.

I sat under false presentations of the Bible for a long time, which is why I don't sit under them anymore.
I'll tell you what...as an example, let's substitute "Catholicism" for what you've stated above, and see how that works...

" The bottom line is that what makes Catholicism has nothing to do with spiritual truth except that is and accessible to all believers regardless of soteriological positions."

 

[JonC]

Strange.
I never considered what I understand regarding the Scriptures to be based on man-made philosophy, Jon.

In fact, I got my belief strictly from reading God's word.
I didn't need to bring any ideas of judicial philosophy into it, but read it out of it.

I disagree.

Some people, when they read Scripture for themsleves, see certain passages as directing the reader to do something to be saved.
Others see significant statements and understand that it is not what we do, but what God does first, and then we react in faith and belief.

I know. Most of us do not, but that is because we do not like acknowledging that we now see dimly and in part. Spurgeon taught of philosophy coloring each of our dispositions, the "human condition". He is correct. We cannot remove ourselves from our worldviews.

Scripture is like that. We hate it when it reminds us of our inperfections in this life. We want to be like God, I suppose. That is perhaps the original sin.

 

[Iconoclast]

Exactly. Now you are getting it. He did not even mention Calvinism none of that philosophy. He stuck with the Word of God and the events of the New Testament.

Jesus taught Calvinism directly in the gospel of John and did not use the term.

 

[Dave G]

I know. Most of us do not, but that is because we do not like acknowledging that we now see dimly and in part. Spurgeon taught of philosophy coloring each of our dispositions, the "human condition". He is correct. We cannot remove ourselves from our worldviews.

Normally I'd agree, Jon, except for what God's word says about it:

" And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." ( Romans 12:2 ).

See also Ephesians 4:23-24 and Colossians 3:10.

Scripture, by its very nature, transforms the mind of the believer, and they then take on a biblical view of things, instead of a worldly view.
God's word changes our thinking, thereby removing us from our former world views and faulty understandings.
As new creatures in Christ, we grow in both knowledge and grace, and we go from spiritual babes, to mature believers in both worldview and how we view our fellow man.

His word truly is a miraculous thing.

Have you ever experienced how His word changes a person's thinking, to be more like God and His ways?
Personally, the more I read the Scriptures, the better I come to understand them and see things from His point of view.
For example, the more I study His word, the more it impresses upon me my own dire condition that I was in before God graciously revealed His Gospel to me.

Not only have I come to hate my own sins, but the sins that go on around me make me very uncomfortable at times... and I'm also much more sensitive to my own sins than I was just 10 years ago.

I don't like being in this world, Jon, and the older I get, the more I long for a better one, a different one.
It hurts me to be here year after year, and sometimes all I want is to go home to be with Him.

 

[JonC]

Normally I'd agree, Jon, except for one little problem:

" And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." ( Romans 12:2 ).

Scripture, by its very nature, transforms the mind of the believer, and they then take on a biblical view of things, instead of a worldly view.
God's word changes our thinking, thereby removing us from our former world views.
As new creatures in Christ, we grow in both knowledge and grace, and we go from spiritual babes, to mature believers in both worldview and how we view our fellow man.

His word truly is a miraculous thing.

Have you ever experienced how His word changes a person's thinking, to be more like God and His ways?

You forget that Paul was speaking as a believer. Renewing one's mind does not mean ridding one's self of the human condition. I think you are confusing what I mean by philosophy with a bad take on the word.

We have worldviews that are different from each other and different from first century Judaism.

The problem I have with Calvinism is that no Calvinist has explained why the judicial philosophy Calvinism assumes is correct.

I was a Calvinist for decades. I preached and taught in a Calvinist way because that is how I understood Scripture. At some point I realized so much of Calvinism is dependant on philosophies that I could not justify via Scripture.

It did not take long to figure out that no one seemed able to defend Calvinism's core worldview (exchanging for "philosophy"). Calvinists just regurgitate Scripture as if it answers the question because in their blindness it does.

If the base philosophy is correct then I would reconsider Calvinism. Thus far it seems not only absent from but contrary to Scripture.

That is why I am no longer a Calvinist. I became a Calvinist because of issues of the will - and I still affirm those conclusions (I agree with the conclusions of TULIP). But it has been proven to me thus far that Calvinism is on a very weak and humanistic foundation. Again, this could change.

Adding to this is the "spiritual" fruits of some who are very (hyper) Calvinists on this board. It seems the more Calvinistic they are the more un-Christlike their behavior. Borrowing a bit from James White - based on the lack of power Calvinism seems to have in the lives of its adherents, why would a Christian want to be associated with the label?

 

[Dave G]

If the base philosophy is correct then I would reconsider Calvinism.

Respectfully, Jon, I don't think the issue is one that is philosophical in nature.
As for James White, I don't pay much attention to him or his desires to debate people.

I value obedience to the Lord more than getting my point across, but that is something I've come to slowly over time and much study.
God is still working on me.

Finally, I'm not a Calvinist.
If you wish to label me as such, that is fine, but for the record ( and as I've stated before ) I do not take my understanding of Scripture from a systematized theology, and definitely did not borrow it from a man.
Admittedly, I have no use for man-made systematized theologies and commentaries, and disdain their usage as well as other constructs like "bible colleges".

I take seriously the concept of "Sola Scriptura" and came to my understanding strictly through my studies, and nothing more.
In fact, I had never heard of John Calvin before roughly 2003, and that was only after I'd already come to understand election in Scripture.

It seems the more Calvinistic they are the more un-Christlike their behavior

Yes, I've seen that as well...
But I see it quite a bit from some of those that oppose the "doctrines of grace", too.

That said, I must retire to bed.
Work awaits early in the morning.

Good evening to you, sir.