The Biblical teaching of Calvinism

[JonC]

@Barry Johnson ,

The interesting thing is I was a Calvinist for a long time.

I was saved in a Baptist church that was not Calvinistic. But studying scripture things just crept up and God used that to bring me to a Calvinistic understanding.

I preached a sermon including a Calvinistic understanding of the Cross. It was a good sermon and I was satisfied with my teaching. Tge next morning I woke up troubled that I had leaned on my understanding rather than God's Word.

It was the conviction of the Holy Spirit in my life. God had brought me to Calvinism through the study of His Word. But He did not leave me there. I stopped studying Calvinism and started studying Scripture

I took from Calvinism what was meat and spit out the bones. We move from glory to glory.

I have come to realize some people need to stay in a paticular theological system because that is how they understand scripture. That is why I hesitate to point out the problems with Calvinism (its presupposed philosophy).

But Calvinisn, like all of these theologies, are man's understanding and not divinely inspired themselves.

As long as people can grasp that truth I do not think it is a major issue.

 

[Van]

According to Calvinism, it should not be harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. So, Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25 need to be rewritten to read it is no more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God than for a poor man. (Since both are compelled by irresistible grace.)

According to Calvinism, Jesus did not need to speak in parables to control the timing of His revelation, since everyone He spoke to was not able to seek God or trust in Christ. So Matthew 13:11-15 need to be rewritten to read Jesus did not need to speak in parables since everyone was unable to understand the milk of the gospel.

According to Calvinism, God did not need to harden the hearts of unbelieving Jews, because their hearts had already been hardened due to the Fall. So Romans 11:7 needs to be rewritten to read "were already hardened."

According to Calvinism, God does not love the world (humankind) but only His elect. So John 3:16 needs to be rewritten to say "For God so loved the elect, He gave His ...."

According to Calvinism, Christ did not lay His life down as a ransom for all, but only for the elect. So 1 Timothy 2:6 needs to be rewritten to say He laid down His life for all the elect.

According to Calvinism, God does not desire all people to be saved, so 1 Timothy 2:4 needs to be rewritten to say God desires all the elect to be saved.

According to Calvinism, Christ did not purchase those to be destroyed, but only the elect, so 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say the Master had not bought those heading for destruction.

And finality, those that have noticed Calvinism is false doctrine, can be ignored, because false teachers cannot hinder irresistible grace. So once again 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say false teachers cannot introduce destructive heresies.

 

[Iconoclast]

According to Calvinism, it should not be harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. So, Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25 need to be rewritten to read it is no more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God than for a poor man. (Since both are compelled by irresistible grace.)

According to Calvinism, Jesus did not need to speak in parables to control the timing of His revelation, since everyone He spoke to was not able to seek God or trust in Christ. So Matthew 13:11-15 need to be rewritten to read Jesus did not need to speak in parables since everyone was unable to understand the milk of the gospel.

According to Calvinism, God did not need to harden the hearts of unbelieving Jews, because their hearts had already been hardened due to the Fall. So Romans 11:7 needs to be rewritten to read "were already hardened."

According to Calvinism, God does not love the world (humankind) but only His elect. So John 3:16 needs to be rewritten to say "For God so loved the elect, He gave His ...."

According to Calvinism, Christ did not lay His life down as a ransom for all, but only for the elect. So 1 Timothy 2:6 needs to be rewritten to say He laid down His life for all the elect.

According to Calvinism, God does not desire all people to be saved, so 1 Timothy 2:4 needs to be rewritten to say God desires all the elect to be saved.

According to Calvinism, Christ did not purchase those to be destroyed, but only the elect, so 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say the Master had not bought those heading for destruction.

And finality, those that have noticed Calvinism is false doctrine, can be ignored, because false teachers cannot hinder irresistible grace. So once again 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say false teachers cannot introduce destructive heresies.

No need to rewrite anything.....just a need to properly handle all the fine verses you have offered.

 

[JonC]

The thing is that there are biblical teachings of Calvinism. There are biblical teachings of Arminianism. There are biblical teachings of Amyraldianism. And there are biblical teachings of all Christian theologies that are not even of a Calvinist trajectory.

Is Calvinism "the" biblical doctrine? No, of course not. It is the understanding of men about Scripture (often about what is not taught in Scripture itself but "reasoned" by men from Scripture to ask questions about God, man, and redemption).

For the Biblical teachings of Calvinism we have the Bible. These are the teachings that we all agree on. It is those extra things, those additions or questions we want to know but God in His wisdom has chosen not to share, that divides.

 

[37818]

What we can do is explain our interpretations.

Calvinism, Amyraldianism, Arminianism and all of those interpretations not of a Calvinistic trajectory are men's understanding of Scripture.

Obviously none of these understandings are divinely inspired beyond the extent of what they hold in common (scripture).

Unfortunately sometimes people do know where Scripture ends and their understanding begins and choose to lean on their own understanding rather than God's words to us.

For those who have a more mature faith, discussions center on reasoning out scripture in order to understand one another and facilitate communication (not to force one's philosophies, worldviews, theories ot interpretations on other people).

For an over view of my take on the 5 points.
T, total depravity - I believe in, Romans 3:11.
U, uncondtional election, I differ in that I understand the election is unmerited on the part of the elect. I see this as a condition of the election. Ephesians 1:4. Ephesians 2:8.
L, Limted Atonement. I believe in a general atonement, where it does two things, it secures salvation for the elect and further condemns the perishing. Romans 8:34. Because of the gerneral atonement, 1 John 2:2, it is my view all names start out in the Lamb's book of life. Revelation 3:5, 1 John 5:4-5. Revelation 21:7.
I, irresistable grace. While I agree the elect ultimately accept the good news, it is still resisted by others. So I do not accept that term as limiting it to the elect. Acts 7:51, Hebrews 10:29.
P, perseverance of the saints. Where God does the saving and God does the keeping. Any other kind of salvation is untenable.
Again, this is just a light overview of my understanding.

 

[Iconoclast]

For an over view of my take on the 5 points.
T, total depravity - I believe in, Romans 3:11.
U, uncondtional election, I differ in that I understand the election is unmerited on the part of the elect. I see this as a condition of the election. Ephesians 1:4. Ephesians 2:8.
L, Limted Atonement. I believe in a general atonement, where it does two things, it secures salvation for the elect and further condemns the perishing. Romans 8:34. Because of the gerneral atonement, 1 John 2:2, it is my view all names start out in the Lamb's book of life. Revelation 3:5, 1 John 5:4-5. Revelation 21:7.
I, irresistable grace. While I agree the elect ultimately accept the good news, it is still resisted by others. So I do not accept that term as limiting it to the elect. Acts 7:51, Hebrews 10:29.
P, perseverance of the saints. Where God does the saving and God does the keeping. Any other kind of salvation is untenable.
Again, this is just a light overview of my understanding.

It is good to see much agreement. I will answer in more detail in about 3-4 hours....looks like we agree on 4.5 of the five points with a little tweaking.
Election is unmerited.Grace while resisted by all men,is not ultimately resisted by the elect.
That is why it is described as irresistible.

 

[Iconoclast]

This thread is focused on the Biblical teaching of Calvinism.

It is not about philosophy, failed theology, personal anecdotes about failure to grasp truth, double speak,or any novelty ideas.

I can randomly post that I was a professional athlete, or jet pilot,or anything.
I could post I am a greek expert and try like some do to crack open a concordance and offer "in the greek" claims until Archangei or JOJ would jump in an expose such a fraud.
Yes,many deluded persons portray themselves as something they never were.
So on this thread we will focus on the biblical teaching of Calvinism.
Others threads are open for a those other ideas.

 

[37818]

That is why it is described as irresistible.

I understand that is what most Calvinist mean. I am looking at it from the point of view that God's grace being for all men, Titus 2:11. Not that every man hears or understand it.

 

[Iconoclast]

I understand that is what most Calvinist mean. I am looking at it from the point of view that God's grace being for all men, Titus 2:11. Not that every man hears or understand it.

Yes..great verse.
The gospel goes worldwide now.
In the OT. Is was mostly confined among Israelites.,
Notice the language down to verse 14...us,us and purify unto Himself a peculiar people,zealous of good works....
Not all men who ever lived.

I have heard grace described as UNMERITED favor in stead of merited wrath.
That is why election is unmerited favor as we are called to be saints, called to be made holy.

 

[Van]

[QUOTE="Iconoclast, post: 2652627, member: 10065" SNIP
I could post I am a greek expert and try like some do to crack open a concordance and offer "in the greek" claims until Archangei or JOJ would jump in an expose such a fraud. SNIP[/QUOTE]

Some here simply copy and paste Calvinist screed, and then insult those who actually study God's word. They are springs without water.

Calvinism is not only unbiblical, it is obviously unbiblical.

According to Calvinism, it should not be harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. So, Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25 need to be rewritten to read it is no more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God than for a poor man. (Since both are compelled by irresistible grace.)

According to Calvinism, Jesus did not need to speak in parables to control the timing of His revelation, since everyone He spoke to was not able to seek God or trust in Christ. So Matthew 13:11-15 need to be rewritten to read Jesus did not need to speak in parables since everyone was unable to understand the milk of the gospel.

According to Calvinism, God did not need to harden the hearts of unbelieving Jews, because their hearts had already been hardened due to the Fall. So Romans 11:7 needs to be rewritten to read "were already hardened."

According to Calvinism, God does not love the world (humankind) but only His elect. So John 3:16 needs to be rewritten to say "For God so loved the elect, He gave His ...."

According to Calvinism, Christ did not lay His life down as a ransom for all, but only for the elect. So 1 Timothy 2:6 needs to be rewritten to say He laid down His life for all the elect.

According to Calvinism, God does not desire all people to be saved, so 1 Timothy 2:4 needs to be rewritten to say God desires all the elect to be saved.

According to Calvinism, Christ did not purchase those to be destroyed, but only the elect, so 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say the Master had not bought those heading for destruction.

And finality, those that have noticed Calvinism is false doctrine, can be ignored, because false teachers cannot hinder irresistible grace. So once again 2 Peter 2:1 needs to be rewritten to say false teachers cannot introduce destructive heresies.

"Handle" seems to be Calvinist code for either rewrite or redefine to corrupt God's word.

And for those confused about truth, ask yourself did I ever, at any time, claim I was an expert in Greek? Ask yourself why one side would think they need to disparage me, rather than address scripture. The truth is obvious.

 

[37818]

Calvinism is not only unbiblical, it is obviously unbiblical.

I am not a Calvinist, and I have to disagree. The problem, if there is a problem, is what is understood about a Scripture that is other than what that Scripture says and means.
What passage of Scripture in this thread is being passed along contrary to that very Scripture?

 

[Van]

I am not a Calvinist, and I have to disagree. The problem, if there is a problem, is what is understood about a Scripture that is other than what that Scripture says and means.
What passage of Scripture in this thread is being passed along contrary to that very Scripture?

I am sure you read post #30, yet you seem to have ignored the many verses that Calvinism claims they do not mean what they say. So why did you ask the question. To deflect or suggest my statement was not obviously true? Fiddlesticks

 

[Iconoclast]

Van,

[QUOTE="Iconoclast, post: 2652627, member: 10065" SNIP
I could post I am a greek expert and try like some do to crack open a concordance and offer "in the greek" claims until Archangei or JOJ would jump in an expose such a fraud. SNIP[/QUOTE]

Some here simply copy and paste Calvinist screed,

A screed? lets look;from the 1644, confession of faith

1]
All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, (Rom. 8:30, Rom. 11:7, Eph. 1:10–11)

2] by His word and Spirit, (2 Thess. 2:13–14, 2 Cor. 3:3,6)

3] out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; (Rom. 8:2, Eph. 2:1–5, 2 Tim. 1:9–10)

4] enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, (Acts 26:18, 1 Cor. 2:10,12, Eph. 1:17–18)

5] taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; (Ezek. 36:26)

6] renewing their wills, and, by His almighty power, determining them to that which is good, (Ezek. 11:19, Phil. 2:13, Deut. 30:6, Ezek. 36:27)

7] and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: (Eph. 1:19, John 6:44–45)

8] yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace. (Cant. 1:4, Ps. 110:3, John 6:37, Rom. 6:16–18)

We can see clearly these men loved God and His word.No screed here! Just glorying in the work of our Lord.

and then insult those who actually study God's word. They are springs without water.

No such insult was made.

Calvinism is not only unbiblical, it is obviously unbiblical.

A charge is made , a false charge, no proof,aas millions of confessional Christians have found.

According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,
According to Calvinism,

You quote no Calvinists,so why would we assume any Calvinist would say any of that?

And for those confused about truth, ask yourself did I ever, at any time, claim I was an expert in Greek? Ask yourself why one side would think they need to disparage me, rather than address scripture. The truth is obvious.

Oh I see! you thought the comment was about you rather than the two recent examples,lol,no.
I will not forget when your greek offering was reduced to ashes, but that was not what I was referencing

 

[Alan Gross]

What is known as Calvinism is the biblical teaching of Jesus, the Apostles,and Prophets.

Whatever speculation, or philosophy might surround it, does not detract that it is based on the correct teaching of both Spiritual and physical death entering in to the human race by Adam in that day.

All what are known as the 5 points were derived in response to errors present at the time . They were correct responses to defective ideas.

from grace online;“Charles Spurgeon was NOT a Calvinist!” – Grace Online Library
Just for the record, I thought I’d let Spurgeon speak for himself:

What is the heresy of Rome, but the addition of something to the perfect merits of Jesus Christ—the bringing in of the works of the flesh, to assist in our justification? And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here.

I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor.

then this;
A Defense of Calvinism

Well, then since He purchased me when I was dead in sins, does it not follow, as a consequence necessary and logical, that He must have loved me first? Did my Saviour die for me because I believed on Him? No; I was not then in existence; I had then no being. Could the Saviour, therefore, have died because I had faith, when I myself was not yet born? Could that have been possible? Could that have been the origin of the Saviour's love towards me? Oh! no; my Saviour died for me long before I believed. "But," says someone, "He foresaw that you would have faith; and, therefore, He loved you." What did He foresee about my faith? Did He foresee that I should get that faith myself, and that I should believe on Him of myself? No; Christ could not foresee that, because no Christian man will ever say that faith came of itself without the gift and without the working of the Holy Spirit. I have met with a great many believers, and talked with them about this matter; but I never knew one who could put his hand on his heart, and say, "I believed in Jesus without the assistance of the Holy Spirit."

I am bound to the doctrine of the depravity of the human heart, because I find myself depraved in heart, and have daily proofs that in my flesh there dwelleth no good thing. If God enters into covenant with unfallen man, man is so insignificant a creature that it must be an act of gracious condescension on the Lord's part; but if God enters into covenant with sinful man, he is then so offensive a creature that it must be, on God's part, an act of pure, free, rich, sovereign grace. When the Lord entered into covenant with me, I am sure that it was all of grace, nothing else but grace. When I remember what a den of unclean beasts and birds my heart was, and how strong was my unrenewed will, how obstinate and rebellious against the sovereignty of the Divine rule, I always feel inclined to take the very lowest room in my Father's house, and when I enter Heaven, it will be to go among the less than the least of all saints, and with the chief of sinners.

The only thing better than this, is seeing it "con't"!!! Beautiful!!

 

[Scott Downey]

'he greatly helped those who had believed through grace'

Grace precedes our faith to believe, we believe through grace then grace produces in us our faith.
Grace ensures the promise of God is made certain, that promise is eternal life for the sheep.

Acts 18:26-28
New King James Version
26 So he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.
27 And when he desired to cross to Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him; and when he arrived, he greatly helped those who had believed through grace; 28 for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.

Romans 3:24
being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all

Yes it s of faith but the reason for the faith is that it is according to grace, and God does not give grace for all to believe.
Without the grace first, you would have no faith to believe.

 

[Iconoclast]

I understand that is what most Calvinist mean. I am looking at it from the point of view that God's grace being for all men, Titus 2:11. Not that every man hears or understand it.

T.U.L.I.P. Reformed Theology, James Montgomery Boice | The Reformed Reader

I stands for irresistible grace. Left to ourselves we resist the grace of God. But when God works in our hearts, regenerating us and creating a renewed will within, then what was undesirable before becomes highly desirable, and we run to Jesus just as previously we ran away from Him. Fallen sinners do resist God's grace, but His regenerating grace is effectual. It overcomes sin and accomplishes God's purpose.

Irresistible Grace & Effectual Calling | Monergism
“You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you” (Acts 7:51).

This passage, which is often used in an attempt to refute the biblical doctrine of irresistible grace, actually supports it. Notice the condition of the persons who are doing the resisting: their hearts and ears are uncircumcised, which is the Bible's way of saying they are unregenerate or unspiritual. A person in this condition will always resist the outward call of the gospel.


The Holy Spirit may convict them of sin and work to show them their need to Christ, but as long as they remain unregenerate, their hearts will remain closed to Christ. Irresistible grace does not mean that whenever the Spirit works He is irresistible. Rather, it means that while His promptings are always resisted by the dead in sin, He can make the gospel irresistible when He opens their spiritually blind eyes, when he opens their deaf ears and turns their heart of stone to a heart of flesh. He quickens us while we are dead, which is no work of man. As Ephesians 2:5 says, “Even when we were dead in our trespasses, [He] made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved.”
Monergism.com

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day...No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:37-39 and 44

 

[Iconoclast]

The External and Internal Call

by Wilhelmus a Brakel

Excerpt from The Christian's Reasonable Service by Wilhelmus a Brakel

Thus far we have discussed the Surety of the covenant and the partakers of this covenant, the church. We shall now proceed to consider the ways in which the Lord brings these partakers of the covenant into the covenant, and how He leads them to the ultimate goal of eternal felicity. The first aspect of this way is the calling.The Calling: God’s Declaration of the Gospel to Sinners

The calling is a gracious work of God, whereby He invites the sinner by means of the gospel to exchange the state of sin and wrath for Christ, in order that through Him he may be reconciled to God and obtain godliness and salvation. By means of this calling He also, by the Holy Spirit, efficaciously translates His elect into this state.

The calling is a gracious work of God: “And (the king) sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:3, 14); “...Him that hath called us to glory and virtue” (2 Pet. 1:3); “God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor. 1:9).

God calls neither by the law of nature nor by the works of nature , whereby, in doing good, He nevertheless does not leave Himself without witness to the heathen (Acts 14:17). “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him” (Acts 17:27). For in all this Christ is neither proclaimed to them nor are they exhorted to believe in Him. The heathen are subject to the covenant of works, and whatever God does in and toward them has reference to that covenant. They are thus obligated to live according to this rule, “Do this and thou shalt live.” Therefore neither the law of nature, nor God’s works belong to the calling; the heathen are not called.

This call also does not occur by way of the moral law of Scripture . The moral law must be viewed in a twofold sense: It must be viewed either in its demands, whereby it reveals the perfect conditions of the covenant of works, or in its purpose, as having been given to the church as a rule of life and as the standard for true holiness. In its first sense the law is preached to convict man of sin (Rom. 3:20), thus bringing man to despair of being saved by his works. Here the function of the law ends. If, however, Christ is simultaneously preached by means of the gospel, man, being rejected by the law, is allured by the gospel. Thus, wherever Christ is preached, the law functions as a schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ (Gal. 3:24). The law, however, neither teaches about Christ nor calls to Him, and thus the moral law is not a functional element of the calling. This is different as far as the ceremonial law is concerned, which belongs to the gospel.

The true means whereby we are called, however, is the gospel. “Whereunto He called you by our gospel” (2 Th. 2:14). The word “gospel” means a good tiding , the content of which is as follows: “Poor man, you are subject to sin and to the wrath of God. You are traversing upon the way which will end in eternal perdition. God, however, has sent His Son Jesus Christ to be a Surety; in His suffering and death there is the perfect satisfaction of the justice of God, and thus acquittal from guilt and punishment. In His obedience to the law there is perfect holiness, so that He can completely save all who go unto God through Him. Christ offers you all His merits, and therefore eternal salvation.” He calls and invites everyone: “Turn unto Me and be saved, receive Me, surrender to Me, enter into a covenant with Me and you will not perish but have everlasting life.” This declaration is recorded in the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments. The first gospel declaration is found in Genesis 3:15, where we read that the Seed of the woman will bruise the head of the serpent . Since then, God has frequently and in various ways caused the gospel to be proclaimed (Heb. 1:1). “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them” (Heb. 4:2). Prior to the coming of Christ it was called the gospel of promises . “...separated unto the gospel of God, (which He had promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures)” (Rom. 1:1–2). Subsequent to Christ’s coming it is called the gospel of fulfillment . “Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled” (Mark 1:14–15).

 

[Iconoclast]

Concerning Efficacious Grace | Monergism

BY JONATHAN EDWARDS

1. It is manifest that the Scripture supposes that if ever men are turned from sin, God must undertake it, and he must be the doer of it, that it is his doing that must determine the matter, and that all that others can do will avail nothing without his agency. This is manifest by such texts as these: Jer. 31:18-19 , “Turn thou me, and I shall be turned; Thou art the Lord my God. Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh,” etc. Lam. 5:21 , “Turn thou us unto thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned.” Psa. 80:3 , “Turn us again, O God, and cause thy face to shine, and we shall be saved.” The same in Psa. 80:7 , 19 ; Jer. 3:14 .

3. Great part of the gospel is denied by those who deny pure efficacious grace. They deny that wherein actual salvation and the application of redemption mainly consists, and how unlikely are such to be successful in their endeavors after actual salvation!

Turnbull’s explanation of Phil. 2:12 , 13 , “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do of his own good pleasure,” is this (Christian Philosophy, p. 96, 97), “Give all diligence to work out your salvation, for it is God, the Creator of all things, who, by giving you, of his good pleasure, the power of willing and doing, with a sense of right and wrong, and reason to guide and direct you, has visibly made it your end so to do. Your frame shows that to prepare yourselves for great moral happiness, arising from a well cultivated and improved mind, suitably placed, is your end appointed to you by your Creator. Consider, therefore, that by neglecting this your duty, this your interest, you contemn and oppose the good will of God towards you, and his design in creating you.”

8. Acts 12:23 . God was so angry with Herod for not giving him the glory of his eloquence, that the angel of the Lord smote him immediately, and he died a miserable death: he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. But if it be very sinful for a man to take to himself the glory of such a qualification as eloquence, how much more a man’s taking to himself the glory of divine grace, God’s own image, and that which is infinitely God’s most excellent, precious, and glorious gift, and man’s highest honor, excellency, and happiness, whereby he is partaker of the divine nature and becomes a God-like creature? If God was so jealous for the glory of so small a gift, how much more for so high an endowment, this being that alone, of all other things, by which man becomes like God? If man takes the glory of it to himself, he thereby will be in the greatest danger of taking the glory to himself that is due to God, and of setting up himself as standing in competition with God, as vying with the Most High, and making himself a god and not a man. If not giving God the glory of that which is least honorable, provokes God’s jealousy, much more must not giving God the glory of that which is infinitely the most honorable. It is allowed, the apostle insists upon it, that the primitive Christians should be sensible that the glory of their gifts belonged to God, and that they made not themselves to differ. But how small a matter is this, if they make themselves to differ in that, which the apostle says is so much more excellent than all gifts!

 

[37818]

I am sure you read post #30, yet you seem to have ignored the many verses that Calvinism claims they do not mean what they say. So why did you ask the question. To deflect or suggest my statement was not obviously true? Fiddlesticks

You make claims for Calvintism.

According to Calvinism, . . .

Who on this thread made those arguments you claim to refute?
Do you deny the saved are God's elect? I do not think so.
1 Timothy 2:5-6, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." Are not the "all" all those whom Christ mediates? Are they not God's elect?

Again, I am not a Calvinist. But where I think a Calvinist is mistaken in his/her thinking I would point out how I understand it differently.

 

[37818]

T.U.L.I.P. Reformed Theology, James Montgomery Boice | The Reformed Reader

I stands for irresistible grace. Left to ourselves we resist the grace of God. But when God works in our hearts, regenerating us and creating a renewed will within, then what was undesirable before becomes highly desirable, and we run to Jesus just as previously we ran away from Him. Fallen sinners do resist God's grace, but His regenerating grace is effectual. It overcomes sin and accomplishes God's purpose.

Irresistible Grace & Effectual Calling | Monergism
“You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you” (Acts 7:51).

This passage, which is often used in an attempt to refute the biblical doctrine of irresistible grace, actually supports it. Notice the condition of the persons who are doing the resisting: their hearts and ears are uncircumcised, which is the Bible's way of saying they are unregenerate or unspiritual. A person in this condition will always resist the outward call of the gospel.


The Holy Spirit may convict them of sin and work to show them their need to Christ, but as long as they remain unregenerate, their hearts will remain closed to Christ. Irresistible grace does not mean that whenever the Spirit works He is irresistible. Rather, it means that while His promptings are always resisted by the dead in sin, He can make the gospel irresistible when He opens their spiritually blind eyes, when he opens their deaf ears and turns their heart of stone to a heart of flesh. He quickens us while we are dead, which is no work of man. As Ephesians 2:5 says, “Even when we were dead in our trespasses, [He] made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved.”
Monergism.com

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day...No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:37-39 and 44

For those who are God's elect and believe, irresstable and effectual grace can be argued. Furthermore those who resist God's grace, Hebrews 10:29, it can be further argued they fail to comprehend it, John 1:5, John 3:19-20. And so do not understand it to believe according to irrestable grace, 2 Corinthians 4:3-4.