What is calvinism?

[npetreley]

npetreley -- I would remind you that in that verse, Jesus is informing those who thought they were saved that they weren't. IOW, has nothing to do with this conversation.

skypair

It has everything to do with this conversation. It's about knowledge/foreknowledge and salvation.

Remember "Those He foreknew, He also predestined"? Jesus uses the same Greek word here, "ginosko", only it doesn't have a "pro" (fore) in front of it. Jesus is telling them He never "knew" them in a personal sense. They were never His.

If, as you and others assert, "Those He foreknew" meant salvation depended upon what God foreknows we will choose, the logical opposite would have been for Jesus to say, "I always knew you were evil-doers." But that's not what He says. He says "I never knew you", as opposed to "Those He foreknew" (proginsoko). So the knowledge is about knowing people, not about knowing what people will choose.

 

[psalms109:31]

Foreknew

Jesus had known who would believe and who would betray.

Jesus knows who the Father has given to Him.

We know who they are by God's word.

Those who do not lean on thier own understand but to trust in Jesus.

Do not trust in what you believe.

Believe in the words of Jesus.

That God does love the world (you) that whosover (anybody) believes in Jesus (not themselves and not what they believe) shall not perish but have eternal life.

 

[skypair]

Remember "Those He foreknew, He also predestined"? Jesus uses the same Greek word here, "ginosko", only it doesn't have a "pro" (fore) in front of it. Jesus is telling them He never "knew" them in a personal sense. They were never His.

If, as you and others assert, "Those He foreknew" meant salvation depended upon what God foreknows we will choose, the logical opposite would have been for Jesus to say, "I always knew you were evil-doers." But that's not what He says. He says "I never knew you", as opposed to "Those He foreknew" (proginsoko). So the knowledge is about knowing people, not about knowing what people will choose.

npetreley -- first off, it was GOD who foreknew but in Mt 25 it is CHRIST who didn't know them. Basically, there are a lot of things known to the Father and not by the Son during His life here. Like "the day and the hour." Like that Israel "wouldn't be gathered [by Him] as a hen gathers her chicks."

Second, for purposes of the parable, He never knew them as his betrothed! Who is it goes in the rapture like the "wise vergins" do? Those whom Paul had "espoused" to Christ, 2Cor 11:2. Paul likewise in Rom 8:9 says "him who hath not the Spirit ["oil"] is none of His."

In light of these things that you had never considered before, I recommend you reconsider your Calvinist leanings.

skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

The sanctification you see before justification is of people who go to church being set apart to hear the gospel. Is that right? Infants sanctified by a believing parent? Not saved but set apart thereby?

No. The setting apart in 2 Thess 2:13 and 1 Peter 1:2 is not a setting apart to hear the gospel, but a setting apart to be saved. Read 1 Peter 1:2: we are set apart by the Spirit to obey and be sprinkled by his blood. The setting apart there is clearly prior to salvation, at least logically.

OK, but I have been talking about the sanctification that FOLLOWS justification (in case you couldn't tell).

yes, I know. And I have been telling you that the verses we are talking about are not about that sanctification.

Specifically, no one receives this sanctification (which is the "new birth" by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit) except they BELIEVE -- except ehy first are JUSTIFIED by God.

I agree. But that is not the topic of discussion here.

Did you or didn't you follow my analogy with Adam's 3 deaths and Christ's 3 lives?

Don't even recall seeing it.

 

[skypair]

No. The setting apart in 2 Thess 2:13 and 1 Peter 1:2 is not a setting apart to hear the gospel, but a setting apart to be saved. Read 1 Peter 1:2: we are set apart by the Spirit to obey and be sprinkled by his blood. The setting apart there is clearly prior to salvation, at least logically.

We should get back to this if you follow what I am saying. Scripture can't deny what is true elsewhere in scripture, right?

Don't even recall seeing it.

Consider how man LOST salvation: Adam ate the forbidden fruit (believed Satan) and died in his soul immediately and died in his spirit progressively.

Now here we have the reverse -- man must believe God Who saves man's soul immediately and saves man's spirit progressively. That is, saves his soul and then REGENERATES.

You basically have no "mechanism" whereby man is regenerated before faith, do you? You have no "type" either -- no example. All you can give me is he just is regenerated because he is "elect," isn't that so? When, Larry?? By what miracle of grace prior to faith??

I gave you Acts 19 for a pattern -- OT, justified believers who came to Paul lacking regeneration named Christ whereupon they were sanctified/regenerated by the Holy Ghost. I gave you the further example that the OT justified saints will not be regenerated until they are resurrected by the Spirit into the MK of Christ.

skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

We should get back to this if you follow what I am saying. Scripture can't deny what is true elsewhere in scripture, right?

Exactly, which rules out your position.

Consider how man LOST salvation: Adam ate the forbidden fruit (believed Satan) and died in his soul immediately and died in his spirit progressively.

The Bible makes no distinction between the soul and spirit. It is the immaterial part of man. The two passages that seem to distinguish (1 thes 5:23; Heb 4:12) are talking about the totality of man and the very inner part of man. The terms elsewhere are used interchangeably. Furthermore, when Adam ate of the tree, he died spiritually immediately; physical death began its process in his body.

You basically have no "mechanism" whereby man is regenerated before faith, do you? You have no "type" either -- no example. All you can give me is he just is regenerated because he is "elect," isn't that so? When, Larry?? By what miracle of grace prior to faith??

First, I don't think man is regenerated before faith. But even at that, I am not sure why I need a "mechanism." I limit my theology to what Scripture says and the necessary consequences of it..

I gave you Acts 19 for a pattern -- OT, justified believers who came to Paul lacking regeneration named Christ whereupon they were sanctified/regenerated by the Holy Ghost.

And as I said, Acts is not a pattern of much at all, particulary with respect to the Spirit.

I gave you the further example that the OT justified saints will not be regenerated until they are resurrected by the Spirit into the MK of Christ.

OT saints were regenerated just like NT saints.

 

[skypair]

The Bible makes no distinction between the soul and spirit. It is the immaterial part of man. The two passages that seem to distinguish (1 thes 5:23; Heb 4:12) are talking about the totality of man and the very inner part of man. The terms elsewhere are used interchangeably. Furthermore, when Adam ate of the tree, he died spiritually immediately; physical death began its process in his body.

Which is another weakness of Calvinism -- not distinguishing between soul, spirit salvation. Like I've been saying -- it marks the difference between "justification" and "sanctification." But Calvinists only know sanctification or either equate the 2 thereby totally invalidating their sotierology. Free will (specifically, my late pastor Dr. Rogers) is one who differentiates the important differences so that salvation may be completely understood.

Do you or don't you acknowledge soul and spirit?

First, I don't think man is regenerated before faith. But even at that, I am not sure why I need a "mechanism." I limit my theology to what Scripture says and the necessary consequences of it..

Mechanism = cause. What causes man to be regenerated then and when does it happen? Cause most of your Calvinist buddies say regeneration before faith. I'm willing to consider your "take" that "stays on the ranch" (I can't imagine how) with the rest of Calvinism though.

And as I said, Acts is not a pattern of much at all, particulary with respect to the Spirit.

Sad. This is nothing but brain washing and refusal to consider and analyze other thoughts.

OT saints were regenerated just like NT saints.

Right -- eventually. Eventually they will be resurrected by the Spirit from the grave and live the life we do in their flesh in what is known as the MK. We are already resurrected from the "grave" of Christ and are living our resurrected life. You're part right and you're part wrong, Lar. Acts 19 was a "dividing line."

skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

Which is another weakness of Calvinism -- not distinguishing between soul, spirit salvation.

That's not a Calvinism issue. It is unrelated.

Do you or don't you acknowledge soul and spirit?

Yes, I aknowledge the soul and spirit. Biblically, they are the same. The terms are used interchangeably for the immaterial part of man.

Mechanism = cause. What causes man to be regenerated then and when does it happen?

God's grace causes it to happen.

Sad. This is nothing but brain washing and refusal to consider and analyze other thoughts.

That's nonsense. The book of Acts is a transition in the church age. Therefore, certain things are descriptive, not prescriptive. That is pretty common knowledge, but somehow we just can't underestimate lack of teaching these days.

Right -- eventually. Eventually they will be resurrected by the Spirit from the grave and live the life we do in their flesh in what is known as the MK. We are already resurrected from the "grave" of Christ and are living our resurrected life. You're part right and you're part wrong, Lar. Acts 19 was a "dividing line."

You are just making stuff up.

 

[skypair]

That's [soul vs. spirit] not a Calvinism issue. It is unrelated.

Ha-ha-ha!! Sorry Larry. I just expected that a "systematice theology" would deal with this. :laugh: So does this mean that you don't care if there is a difference to God?

Yes, I aknowledge the soul and spirit. Biblically, they are the same. The terms are used interchangeably for the immaterial part of man.

So you believe they are "interchangeable"-- like faith and belief -- like "foreknow" and "predestine." Actually, these and others reveal a shortfall in your understanding of God, of salvation, and of Christian theology.

God's grace causes it [regeneration] to happen.

Right -- but on what basis, Lar?? You told me once that you believed you were "elect." I asked you how did you know. I don't think I ever got a response and that goes to the heart of everything we've been discussing here. Do you have an answer?

That's nonsense. The book of Acts...

The preaching of the gospel is nonsense to those who don't believe but unto us it is life from the dead. Be careful what you call nonsense and what you won't bother to look into.

You are just making stuff up.

It's called "dispensationalism," Larry. And I'm not smart enough to make it up but I am spiritual enough to recognize it with a little Helper. I suppose this means that you don't see a pretrib rapture either, right? Watch out for those "blind guides," Larry. They ought to have called it "systematic but incomplete theology!" :laugh:

Larry, I'm not making fun of YOU -- but I am trying to provoke you unto good works, Heb 10:24-25, "but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." Your theology needs "critical care," Lar. You have unresolved issues whether you want to be honest with yourself or not. Me "making this up" is not even close -- but I suppose it sets you free from any critical analysis of the issues of Christianity vs. Calvinism.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Larry

C'mon, Larry -- no pouting. raying: I know you're there! :laugh: What's it gonna be? Soul? Regeneration? Not enought time to think about it?

skypair

 

[johnp.]

You basically have no "mechanism" whereby man is regenerated before faith, do you?

Luke 1:43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

There is regeneration with faith before physical birth. How does that fit in with your mechanism skypair?

john.

 

[Allan]

Please don't tell me you hold to THAT (John saved before birth) Garbage. Scripture is dogmatic that unless you believe (something an infant and babe CAN NOT do yet) you can not be saved.

The Spirit filled many people of the OT but also LEFT them. John was NOT saved before birth but we do the the Spirit filled him at that instance.

There is no removal of sin WITHOUT the shedding of blood. John was STILL IN his sin, that was covered only. Jesus. In main line Calvinism - Regeneration is not salvation but one day (some time future) it leads to it, but not that regeneration IS salvation (that is a Non-Cal view). John is one of the redeemed I grant you without question. You just go against scripture completely to espouse he was saved from the womb.

 

[TomMann]

I agree that he was not saved from the womb. My bible says we are saved from the foundation of the world....

 

[johnp.]

Please don't tell me you hold to THAT (John saved before birth) Garbage. Scripture is dogmatic that unless you believe (something an infant and babe CAN NOT do yet) you can not be saved.

I am sorry to disappoint you Allan but I do hold to that and what is more I have scripture and not just my words to back it up.

The Spirit filled many people of the OT but also LEFT them. John was NOT saved before birth but we do the the Spirit filled him at that instance.

Being 'Spirit filled' is unnecessary for salvation. Surely if a person rejoices at the coming of their Lord then they are saved. The baby John reacted with joy. the sinful mind is hostile to God... Rom 8:7. The sinful mind is at emnity with God. The sinful mind is at war with God.

PS 58:3 Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

There is more to being a baby than many think.

In main line Calvinism - Regeneration is not salvation but one day (some time future) it leads to it, but not that regeneration IS salvation (that is a Non-Cal view).

I couldn't understand your words before this quote. Regeneration is not salvation in main line Calvinism? So you say that John was regenerated but unsaved at that time?

just go against scripture completely to espouse he was saved from the womb.

I do? I don't. Ex 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Acts 2:39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."

I agree that he was not saved from the womb. My bible says we are saved from the foundation of the world.... (TomMann)

john.

 

[Allan]

I am sorry to disappoint you Allan but I do hold to that and what is more I have scripture and not just my words to back it up.

Surely? Then show it.

Being 'Spirit filled' is unnecessary for salvation. Surely if a person rejoices at the coming of their Lord then they are saved. The baby John reacted with joy. the sinful mind is hostile to God... Rom 8:7. The sinful mind is at emnity with God. The sinful mind is at war with God.

That is quite odd since the children of Israel who rejoiced in God after fleeing Egypt but was sinful,disobedient and rebellious to the point of not being allowed into the promised the land. (that is but one example of many where people rejoiced to and for God but were still at enmity with God. We even know that Pagan Nations proclaimed Him as God of Gods and rejoiced. Surely many people will rejoice at the coming of their Lord and find that He was never their Lord to begin with. Emotion is not what saves nor is the defining charactor of one who Is saved, though it does play a part in our lives.

PS 58:3 From birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

No problem there, for we are all born sinners seperated from God and UNSAVED.
We are not born justified or saved. The wrath of God abides on even the redeemed until they repent and believe.

There is more to being a baby than many think.

Enlighten us please.

Regeneration is not salvation in main line Calvinism? So you say that John was regenerated but unsaved at that time?

I didn't say John was regenerated either though that is the main or standard view of Calvinism regarding regeneration unto salvation.
King Saul was filled with the Spirit but was also possesed by demons.
Sampson was filled with the Spirit but also was selfish, disobedient to the laws of God, willful, sinnful.
The filling of the Spirit concerns empowering for service with regard to the OT and not specific to salvation. John the Baptist is called the great of all the OT prophets. He was not sealed by the spirit as NT believers are because that was ONLY made possible at the death, resurrection AND Jesus assention that the Spirit may come. The OT saints had obtained salvation but could not partake in the full benifits due to their sins only being covered and not fully atoned for - to the removal of them. John is still in that catagory yet he was not saved until he repented and believed as well. Though I do believe he was probably uncharactoristically young and knowledgable due to Gods determinded use for him regarding making the way straight for Christ to preach.

I do? I don't. Ex 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Acts 2:39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."

How does Ex 20:5 help your argument?? God blesses those who love him and keep his commandments. God gives conditions for His blessings?? I thought all was predeterminded so there is NEVER a need to say if you will do this I will do that - As God states throughout the scriptures. Your veiw makes God inconsistant with His own determining and inconsistant with the scirptures to whom these CHOICES are given.
You really don't want to use Acts 2:39 since the scructure of the sentence establishes and ALL principle. ALL those hearing will be saved...ALL of their children will be saved... and ALL those afar off... as many as God will call. That last part is not in the negitive but the affirimative. That God will send His call out beyond them to whomever He wishes. (Not just the Jews but also to the Gentiles).

 

[Allan]

I would like to see the scripture that states we are saved from the foundation of the world...also known as eternal justification.

We are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world but that does not mean you are saved from the foundation of the world.

 

[johnp.]

That is quite odd since the children of Israel who rejoiced in God after fleeing Egypt...

Is this revisionism? I see no rejoicing. And you contradict God when you say that because He tells you that He did not give them eyes to see or ears to hear so how could they hear and see? You contradict God with what you say.

(that is but one example of many where people rejoiced to and for God but were still at enmity with God.

The straws you are clutching at would have been useful to the slaves making the bricks.

DT 29:2 Moses summoned all the Israelites and said to them: Your eyes have seen all that the LORD did in Egypt to Pharaoh, to all his officials and to all his land. 3 With your own eyes you saw those great trials, those miraculous signs and great wonders. 4 But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear. A contradiction on your part.

We even know that Pagan Nations proclaimed Him as God of Gods and rejoiced.

How can nations proclaim anything? How can nations rejoice? If you mean pagans can worship God then that is not Christianity pure and simple.

Surely many people will rejoice at the coming of their Lord and find that He was never their Lord to begin with.

That some false Christians will have a rude awakening that is not doubted but the idea that a false Christian can rejoice in the Lord is a denial of scripture isn't it? the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.

We are not born justified or saved. The wrath of God abides on even the redeemed until they repent and believe.

John was saved in the womb. It is Calvinist theology that the children of the children of God and their children are saved. Eze 37:25 They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the land where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children's children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever.
Acts 2:39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."
The promise is for me and my children and those others chosen by God. If He calls all men then He will save all men because of the promise not because of the call. AC 16:31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household."

ALL those hearing will be saved...ALL of their children will be saved... and ALL those afar off... as many as God will call.

Where's the problem?

We are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world but that does not mean you are saved from the foundation of the world.

Don't you think God is omniscient Allan? Would God really write everyone's name in the book when He knew who would not be saved, and erase them when?

The OT saints had obtained salvation but could not partake in the full benifits due to their sins only being covered and not fully atoned for...

Never heard of it man. A new way is it? A new revelation? Abraham is the father of the faith. Next thing you will be telling me is that they did not go to Heaven before Christ died.

I would like to see the scripture that states we are saved from the foundation of the world...

Eph 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

john.

 

[skypair]

Luke 1:43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

There is regeneration with faith before physical birth. How does that fit in with your mechanism skypair?

john.

Sorry, john -- that fits into the manifestations at Pentecost of the "filling" of the Spirit, not regeneration. I hear that often and it is a confusion of "filling" with "indwelling." Do you comprehend the difference?

In "filling," the Spirit can and does leave the person. In "indwelling," which IS regeneration, the Spirit abides forever in the person.

skypair

 

[johnp.]

Sorry, john -- that fits into the manifestations at Pentecost of the "filling" of the Spirit, not regeneration. I hear that often and it is a confusion of "filling" with "indwelling." Do you comprehend the difference?

John 3:6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, `You must be born again.' 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

In "filling," the Spirit can and does leave the person. In "indwelling," which IS regeneration, the Spirit abides forever in the person.

Elizabeth was filled, the scripture does not say John was. Where do you get that from?
Luke 1:43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
Elizabeth was regenerate when Mary visited her. The woman was born again because she saw the Kingdom of God and recognised Him out of sight. The sinful mind is at war with God don't you know? It does not rejoice with but it hates God, sorry skypair.

john.

 

[npetreley]

The concept of John being saved in the womb doesn't fit man's dogma about how salvation works, so you have to throw the obvious interpretation out the window. He lept for joy for some other reason, maybe the way gas makes a baby seem to smile. After all, the proper way to interpret the Bible is to extract some verses that you use to come up with a set of rules on how things work, and then filter the rest of the Bible through those rules, discarding any notion that doesn't fit. God surely never breaks man's rules.

For example, it is appointed to man once to die. Therefore Lazarus is still living among us somewhere because he's not allowed to die a second time after being resurrected.

[/sarcasm]