Which is worse?

[Van]

Two salesmen met on a train. One said if you buy my pig in a poke, I will buy yours for the same price. I think it unwise and certainly unbilbical to buy either mystery meat, when true spiritual meat is offered free of charge from God's Word.

 

[quantumfaith]

Sure. I average about 2 posts a day here and I have a very full life outside this forum, very little of which involves theological discourse. Here, on the theology debate forum, much of the debate centers around the doctrines of soteriology (study of salvation), which is more than just free will. It contains everything having to do with the very reason we exist, breath, and live. Not an unworthy topic of discussion in my opinion.

Some people play a lot of golf, do a lot of fishing, watch a lot of TV etc, but interestingly enough I find this hobby enlightening and enjoyable. So sue me. :wavey:

:smilewinkgrin::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Aaron]

I continually hear Calvinists accuse us of believing mankind is better than they are, but which of these two people are worse?


PERSON 1: This man was born an enemy of God, a sinner and enslaved to his sin. God, in genuine salvific love, provides EVERYTHING this persons needs to be saved. God sends his son for him, sends the gospel to appeal for his reconciliation, and sends the church to minister to his needs. The man freely chooses to refuse all these sincere attempts to the point his heart grows calloused and he dies in his rebellion.

PERSON 2: This man is born an enemy of God, a sinner, and enslaved not only to sin, but he is born enslaved to his depraved will and thus cannot willingly choose to accept God's appeal for reconciliation. His fate is sealed from birth. God doesn't salvific love him or provide for his salvation, but has chosen to pass him by in his depraved natural condition from before he was born. He is born calloused in rebellion and dies calloused in rebellion all as predetermined by his creator.

I say the first person is MUCH worse than the second because the first person rebells in the face of God's genuine love and gracious provisions. The second is just doing what he was made to do kind of like an insane man who can't help his inborn desire and is declared "not guilty by reason of insanity." The first is WHOLLY guilty because he freely rejected and chose what desires he would follow. He truly has no defense.

The question should be, which is true?

However, the OP is a tacit capitulation to my argument, that you believe that those who choose Christ, do so because they are better people than those who do not.

 

[Forest]

I continually hear Calvinists accuse us of believing mankind is better than they are, but which of these two people are worse?


PERSON 1: This man was born an enemy of God, a sinner and enslaved to his sin. God, in genuine salvific love, provides EVERYTHING this persons needs to be saved. God sends his son for him, sends the gospel to appeal for his reconciliation, and sends the church to minister to his needs. The man freely chooses to refuse all these sincere attempts to the point his heart grows calloused and he dies in his rebellion.

PERSON 2: This man is born an enemy of God, a sinner, and enslaved not only to sin, but he is born enslaved to his depraved will and thus cannot willingly choose to accept God's appeal for reconciliation. His fate is sealed from birth. God doesn't salvific love him or provide for his salvation, but has chosen to pass him by in his depraved natural condition from before he was born. He is born calloused in rebellion and dies calloused in rebellion all as predetermined by his creator.

I say the first person is MUCH worse than the second because the first person rebells in the face of God's genuine love and gracious provisions. The second is just doing what he was made to do kind of like an insane man who can't help his inborn desire and is declared "not guilty by reason of insanity." The first is WHOLLY guilty because he freely rejected and chose what desires he would follow. He truly has no defense.

Person 3; God, in his forknowledge, looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God. Every one of them is gone back. They are altogether become filthy, there is none that doeth good, no, not one, Ps 53:2-3. This is what God had to choose from when He choose his elect before the foundation of the world, Eph 1. God gave them to Christ in a covenant relationship with his Son to die on the cross and reconclie them back to him. This shows the depravity of man and the grace of God.

 

[Forest]

So man's fallen nature is more powerful than the gospel appeal according to your view? Why?

Most Calvinists would affirm that God's salvific love is effectual and thus is reserved for the elect alone. Some Cals affirm a common/general love of God for all creation, but that is why I said 'salvific.'

Why not? Is it because they have contra-casually chosen to rebel, or because God really wants to have nothing to do with them?

So, why does Paul call these same brethren 'natural/carnal' men who can't receive these spiritual truths in the very next verses?

"1 Brothers, I was not able to speak to you as spiritual people but as people of the flesh, as babies in Christ. 2 I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were not yet able to receive it. In fact, you are still not able, 3 because you are still fleshly. For since there is envy and strife among you, are you not fleshly and living like ordinary people?"

Listen, prior to the gospel being REVEALED by the Spirit in scripture and through the preaching of the apostles it was a 'mystery.' Right? So, what are the means the Spirit makes these deep truths and mysteries of God known?

Answer: Inspiring the writing of scriptures, like I Corinthians, so as to explain it to them?

or...

Cal Answer: Secret inward irresistibly working of the spirit?

Babes in Christ are born again children. When we are regenerated we do not lose our fleshly nature but carry it with us along with the Spirit, that's the warfare Paul tells us about that goes on inside of the regenerated child of God.

 

[Forest]

Certainly the TULI of the Tulip are unbiblical false doctrine. Skandelon is quite correct that the bible teaches the lost are people # 1. Calvinism invented people #2.

The post and post and constantly rephrase, saying what sounds like truth but defining the words used in a way as to support falsehood.

Thus they say everything was paid on the Cross, sounding like Jesus died for all mankind, but meaning everything was paid on the Cross for God's previously chosen elect but not for anyone else.

This kind of disingeneous defense is necessary to hide the fact that Calvinism is plainly false doctrine.

John 6:37-41 says that Christ died only for those that God gave him and that he would not lose one of them but raise them all up at the last day. Does that sound like he is talking about all mankind?

 

[Skandelon]

The question should be, which is true?

However, the OP is a tacit capitulation to my argument, that you believe that those who choose Christ, do so because they are better people than those who do not.

You believe they are better too Aaron. Its just whether they are made to be better by irresistible force or enabled to be better by free will in response to God's gracious provision. The latter at least makes some common sense, where as the former has God rewarding himself, not the morally accountable creature as indicated in the scripture.

I know you think the issue of irresistible grace is a 'peripheral matter' but its not.

 

[Aaron]

You believe they are better too Aaron.

Not at all, Chuck. You think they are better by nature. I believe, and Paul and Jesus agree, that only God is good, and that any righteousness or goodness one hasis only by virtue of one's union with Christ, and that no one choses to enter that union.

There was no difference between Jacob or Esau. The difference was in God's purposes according to election.

But now you have explicitly capitulated.

 

[Skandelon]

Not at all, Chuck. You think they are better by nature.

What's "nature" to a theist, Aaron? Do you believe in Mother Nature or something, because you talk like it sometimes. :smilewinkgrin:

When you say, "You think they are better by NATURE." What you are really saying is, "You think they are better by God's doing." Because NATURE is God's Doing, right?

You Calvinists think you can rid your system of divine culpability issues by blaming things on 'nature' but you can't.

1. God made men in his image and morally free. (mans nature pre-fall: able to obey or disobey)

2. Men sinned freely and became enemies of God who were unable to save themselves. (man's nature post-fall: able to disobey; unable to obey)

3. God enables them all to be reconciled (saved) through the gospel. (man's nature post-Christ/Holy Spirit: able to disobey; unable to obey, but now able to humble themselves, admit their inability to obey, and believe in the One who obeyed perfectly)

You think that because man's nature is 'unable to obey,' that they are likewise unable to willingly admit their inability to obey and humbly cry out to the one who obeys for us. That is biblically unfounded. "Humble yourself and you will be exalted." Only a Calvinist would think the prodigal's son's pigsty humility which led him to turn back toward home was a boast worthy WORK of the law.

 

[revmwc]

John 6:37-41 says that Christ died only for those that God gave him and that he would not lose one of them but raise them all up at the last day. Does that sound like he is talking about all mankind?

John 6: 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him tha t sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.

Why were they given to him, Verse 40 "...all that see and Believe on Him, may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day."

Paul answers why the Father Gave them to Christ in Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Whom the Father knew them He gave to Christ. He called them and justified them and glorifeid them all based on what He Foreknew. It comes down to what God knew and those He Predestineated to be conformed to the image of His dear Son and gave them to Christ as He tells us in John 6:37-41.
All who would believe were given to Christ, not all God selected randomly, but whom God Foreknew.

I know many don't see God's foreknowledge goes that far but Gos is Omnisiceint and God knows how many hairs we have on our head, do you really think God couldn't know who would Beleieve on the Son before they were even born? God knew man would fall and made the plan of salvation. Do you think He didn't know that before He created Adam and Eve that it would be them who fell and not Cain? Do you think God didn't know Cain would choose not to offer the proper sacrifice and kill Abel? He knew all of this therefore He knew what choices each and everyone would make before we were even born and He presdestined those HE KNEW would chose positively to Believe on HIS DEAR SON.

 

[Herald]

Which is worse? It's like asking who is more wet; the person who dives into a pool or the person who jumps into a river. Wet is wet. Sin is sin. One of the assumptions of the OP is that we somehow know the mind of God in regards to who will inherit eternal life. The secret things belong to God (Deut. 29:29). Whether you are a Calvinist, Arminian, or semi-Pelagian; dying in sin consigns the individual to hell. How worse can that get?

 

[Skandelon]

Which is worse? It's like asking who is more wet; the person who dives into a pool or the person who jumps into a river. Wet is wet. Sin is sin. One of the assumptions of the OP is that we somehow know the mind of God in regards to who will inherit eternal life. The secret things belong to God (Deut. 29:29). Whether you are a Calvinist, Arminian, or semi-Pelagian; dying in sin consigns the individual to hell. How worse can that get?

In the 'real' world you'd be sure to call the sane man who committed premeditated murder worse than the clinically insane man who was born with a chemical imbalance and unable to control himself. A jury would say 'guilty' about one of the them and 'not guilty by reason of insanity' about the other. So, while they both may be wet (murders) one is certainly WORSE than the other.

 

[jbh28]

In the 'real' world you'd be sure to call the sane man who committed premeditated murder worse than the clinically insane man who was born with a chemical imbalance and unable to control himself. A jury would say 'guilty' about one of the them and 'not guilty by reason of insanity' about the other. So, while they both may be wet (murders) one is certainly WORSE than the other.

Not in God's eyes. Both are evil. James 2:10

 

[Skandelon]

Not in God's eyes. Both are evil. James 2:10

We aren't talking about the fact that all have sinned and fall short of God's glory and thus need a savior, we agree on that point. We are talking about what God and by virtue of His revelation, man believes regarding the LEVEL of guilt associated with any particular act of rebellion. Consider this:

"Old Testament law indicates that God looks upon unconscious sin differently from conscious sin. The law prescribed sacrifices for sins done in ignorance or weakness and without willful intent ( Leviticus 4:2-3, 13-14 ). However, Old Testament law provided no sacrifice for conscious sin:

Anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut off from his people. Because he has despised the LORD’s word and broken His commands, that person must surely be cut off; his guilt remains on him (Numbers 15:30-31 NIV).

The New Testament also distinguishes clearly between willful and unconscious sin:

That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked (Luke 12:47-48 NIV).

If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin (John 15:22 NIV).

Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief (1 Timothy 1:13 NIV)."

 

[Skandelon]

That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked ( Luke 12:47-48 ).

Going off this verse alone we can see that non-Calvinists believe mankind is worse than Calvinists do because we affirm that all men have been given much more than the Calvinists do. We believe God has enabled all men and thus they have been 'given much'. We believe they do clearly see and understand the masters revelation, where as Calvinists teach they can't really see it or understand it without being regenerated first, so in our view they KNOW everything and HAVE everything they need to follow the master but freely and consciously choose not to and thus are FAR more guilty by the standard set by Jesus in this passage.

 

[jbh28]

Going off this verse alone we can see that non-Calvinists believe mankind is worse than Calvinists do because we affirm that all men have been given much more than the Calvinists do. We believe God has enabled all men and thus they have been 'given much'. We believe they do clearly see and understand the masters revelation, where as Calvinists teach they can't really see it or understand it without being regenerated first, so in our view they KNOW everything and HAVE everything they need to follow the master but freely and consciously choose not to and thus are FAR more guilty by the standard set by Jesus in this passage.

We believe God has given man the same as you. We just believe that man still rejects that. (2 cor 2:14)

 

[Skandelon]

We believe God has given man the same as you. We just believe that man still rejects that. (2 cor 2:14)

I'm sorry but that is factually incorrect. Are you telling me that a non-regenerate man has the same ability to willingly believe as a regenerate man does in your system? I think not.

The non-elect reprobate doesn't have ANYTHING he needs. He is blind, deaf and dumb...no DEAD to the things of God and has NO HOPE of even responding unless made alive first. What better excuse is there than "I was a corpse" for not responding?

But, if someone where to hear the life-giving message of redemption and then granted ALL that they needed to understand, and accept that message but freely and deliberately chose to reject it anyway. Whoa! That is a one guilty person. That is why we believe that people are worse then Calvinists do.

 

[revmwc]

When it comes right down to it there is only one reason anyone is sentenced to the Lake Of Fire and suffers the second death.

11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Rev. 20:
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Verse 15 tells us whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
How does one not have their name written in the book of life? By not believing on the Lord Jesus Christ as their savior.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Salvation is by Believing on Jesus Christ condemnation comes from not beleiving on the Lord Jesus Christ that what Christ said.

John 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

Verse 48 He that rejeceth Me and receiveth not my words shall be judged in the last days.

The issue of ones eternal home whether with God forever or seperated from Him forever comes down to rejection of Christ. The one who rejects Christ is condemened already. God didn't choose who would accept or reject God elected us based on what HE knew beforehand about the choice one would make to reject or receive Jesus Christ. Salvation is the free gift of God given to all who will accept Him, and God knows exactly who will and who will not accept Him. Based on that knowledge peter say we are Elect, 1 Peter 1: 2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

Paul in Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

That God foreknew and therfore Predestinated us to be conformed to the image of His Son, to make us Christlike, to maker us righteous, justified, sanctified, regenerated to be SAVED.

It is all based on HIS Foreknowledge of us.

 

[thomas15]

First of all, this is a very good thread regardless of the fact that the subject is well talked about here. If only we could get to the nub on another point of theology (the imminent return of the Savior for His elect) better yet.

.........That God foreknew and therfore Predestinated us to be conformed to the image of His Son, to make us Christlike, to maker us righteous, justified, sanctified, regenerated to be SAVED.

It is all based on HIS Foreknowledge of us.

Well said.

As a side note, it is hard for me to get past the fact that on hearing the gospel the first time, I didn't respond in a positive way. And yet I must (if I'm saved) be of the elect. It wasn't until I had heard the gospel numerous times that I believed. Is my experience the norm? I don't think so. And so it is, we tend (I believe) to have our pre-determined outcome to any theological debate and go searching for Scriptural support where we can find it.

The debate here is well argued on both sides. But for me personally, I don't see any Biblical way that I can take any of the credit for my salvation in all it's complexity. I tend to believe that Calvinism has it correct, man is totally depraved. At the very least, this man is. The only way that i can see God breaking past that depravity is by His direct intervention. Any part that I might have in the process, no matter how minute, would in my opinion violate sola gratia.

 

[Aaron]

What's "nature" to a theist, Aaron? Do you believe in Mother Nature or something, because you talk like it sometimes.

When you say, "You think they are better by NATURE." What you are really saying is, "You think they are better by God's doing." Because NATURE is God's Doing, right?

As usual a rebuttal unencumbered by any Scriptural premise. We know by the Scriptures that men by nature hate God. And now here, in addition to your confession that those who choose to receive Christ do so because they are better people than those who do not, we have a tacit admission on your part that the advent of evil in the world is God's doing.