R
Reformed
Guest
How about explaining your answer where a Protestant can understand.?
- Status
R
Reformed
Guest
How about those who never heard the gospel of God’s grace? Can we be saved apart from hearing the gospel of Christ? Please consider Romans chapter 1, chapter 2, and chapter 10 before you answer.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Perhaps you could make a declarative sentence or two as to your point. The riddles are not effective.Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables? Before you answer, you might want to search the Scriptures for the biblical answer
S
SyCarl
Guest
I would think that John was fairly familiar with the writings of the New Testament. After all, Peter referred to Paul’s letters as Scripture and he died more than 20 years before John wrote. We must also remember what John wrote in addition to his statement about Jesus performing many other deeds.
Why did John write? So we could read and believe. What comes from reading? Life. So John essentially is saying that, even though his gospel doesn’t contain everything possible, it does contain what we need to know to believe and to live.
I read the early church fathers. However we must realize that even if some might have been taught by the Apostles, they were capable of error. Being taught by an Apostle does not guarantee that they are correct. After all, Paul personally taught the Galatians and Corinthians but had to send them letters to correct errors that were being taught. Many of the epistles were written to correct errors that were entering the Church. In Revelatin, Jesus himself dictates letters to the seven churches pointing out some errors the were falling into. If this was needed even while the Apostles were still alive we should be cautious of early church writings.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Those who have not formally heard the Gospel will be held accountable for accepting what grace of Christ they have been given.*Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.*This grace flows from Christ, so it is indeed through Him they would be saved.
C
Crusador
Guest
When discussing the five points- one of the main objections is “What about free will?” This is really not a problem for Calvinists. Man is free to be what and who he is- period. He is not free to be what and who he is not.
So the issue that we need to settle is this: What is the spiritual state of fallen man apart from the saving grace of God? If we can establish this truth- we will then be able to put a finger (and a whole lot of Scripture) on the limitations of man.
QUESTION-
*“Do Calvinists believe that we make real choices? In other words, do they teach that we are free to make our own choices; or do they teach that we are merely puppets and robots, as my Campus Pastor continuously implies? I am a little frustrated and very confused, so can you just explain it to me one more time – in simple terms please?” *
ANSWER-
We do not deny that we make real choices. We don’t even deny that we make free choices. Every choice we make is completely voluntary. All we are saying is that our choices are not made without reasons. Our choices do not just arise out of thin air. They are not spontaneous and unpredictable. They are not untraceable; but rather, each and every decision we make has a cause. In other words, there is a real reason why I decide one way and not another. And that reason does not come from without me, or apart from me; it comes from within me.
This is what makes me responsible for my choices. All my choices are in accordance with who I am. We are not technologically programmed to do what we do, as robots are, rather we simply do what we do in accordance with who we are- by nature.
Jesus said that a tree is known by its own fruit. “Every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.” (Matthew 7:17) “For figs are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush.” (Luke 6:44) Jesus is not saying that men do not make choices- he simply teaches that unregenerate men, because of their fallen, depraved, and sinful natures, naturally and consistently make sinful choices. Our choices are a product of our natures.
An important thing to remember is that there is a major difference between being forced to do something, and simply doing something *by necessity *for lack of other options. Men are not forced to commit sinful acts, nor are they forced to make sinful choices, as puppets would be, however when the choices that men do make are issued from corrupted hearts and minds, those choices are by necessity, qualitatively corrupt. For instance, a man is free to speak or not to speak, no one forces him to do one or the other. But when that man chooses to speak, he then must draw his words from the well of a poisoned heart. So this man was free to speak, but by necessity, that which flows out of his mouth will be that which his heart naturally produces. “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” (Luke 6:45) “A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.” (Matthew 7:18) Jesus is not teaching here of coercion, but is simply speaking of the necessity of producing that which is according to nature.
Likewise, we do not teach that men are coerced by outside forces- though we do not entirely dismiss the fact that outside influences play a huge part in the decisions we make. God uses various means to fulfill His purposes, and this we do not deny. But in no way do Calvinists teach that men are merely robots or puppets on strings as some would accuse us to believe. Rather, we say with Jesus that men’s choices are determined by their natures, just as a tree’s fruit will be determined by the type and the quality of the tree. This is clearly what our Lord consistently taught. “O generation of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.” (Matthew 12:34)
What we must continue to communicate to our Pastors and teachers is that all men without exception are “by nature children of wrath” - (Ephesians 2:3) Before conversion, all men are fallen, depraved, and spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:5, Colossians 2:13). We have corrupted hearts (Genesis 6:5, Jeremiah 17:9) and corrupted minds (Romans 1:28, Colossians 1:21). The Bible plainly teaches that by nature we are at enmity with God and hostile toward the gospel (Romans 8:7, 8). And that therefore, since we are bound to act and to choose according to our natures – we need to explain to them where that actually leaves us.
It leaves us in desperate need of a Savior; one who can actually save us, not merely “invite” us to be saved.
So is our problem that we need to be free to choose? No of course not, we are already free to choose. The problem then, is not so much of what we do, as it is of what we are. This is the real issue. We choose to sin because we are sinners, and not the other way around. And so what we really need is - not to be free to choose, but to be freed from the bondage of our sinful natures! Plain and simple. We need to be transformed by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit; that is - we need to be born again; having our fallen and depraved natures supernaturally renovated, and our blind eyes opened to the glory of the sovereign Son of God.
*I know that this is only an introduction to a very important discussion- but please ponder these truths and look up each of these passages to see for yourself whether I have exagerated.
Hopefully this will stimulate some good thought, and we can move on to expound the Doctrine of Monergistic Regeneration-
This is the heart of the Five Points- for when God saves- He saves alone- (There are no Co-Redeemers in the Kingdom of Heaven). To God ALONE be the Glory- now and forever!
God bless you all!
So the issue that we need to settle is this: What is the spiritual state of fallen man apart from the saving grace of God? If we can establish this truth- we will then be able to put a finger (and a whole lot of Scripture) on the limitations of man.
QUESTION-
*“Do Calvinists believe that we make real choices? In other words, do they teach that we are free to make our own choices; or do they teach that we are merely puppets and robots, as my Campus Pastor continuously implies? I am a little frustrated and very confused, so can you just explain it to me one more time – in simple terms please?” *
ANSWER-
We do not deny that we make real choices. We don’t even deny that we make free choices. Every choice we make is completely voluntary. All we are saying is that our choices are not made without reasons. Our choices do not just arise out of thin air. They are not spontaneous and unpredictable. They are not untraceable; but rather, each and every decision we make has a cause. In other words, there is a real reason why I decide one way and not another. And that reason does not come from without me, or apart from me; it comes from within me.
This is what makes me responsible for my choices. All my choices are in accordance with who I am. We are not technologically programmed to do what we do, as robots are, rather we simply do what we do in accordance with who we are- by nature.
Jesus said that a tree is known by its own fruit. “Every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.” (Matthew 7:17) “For figs are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush.” (Luke 6:44) Jesus is not saying that men do not make choices- he simply teaches that unregenerate men, because of their fallen, depraved, and sinful natures, naturally and consistently make sinful choices. Our choices are a product of our natures.
An important thing to remember is that there is a major difference between being forced to do something, and simply doing something *by necessity *for lack of other options. Men are not forced to commit sinful acts, nor are they forced to make sinful choices, as puppets would be, however when the choices that men do make are issued from corrupted hearts and minds, those choices are by necessity, qualitatively corrupt. For instance, a man is free to speak or not to speak, no one forces him to do one or the other. But when that man chooses to speak, he then must draw his words from the well of a poisoned heart. So this man was free to speak, but by necessity, that which flows out of his mouth will be that which his heart naturally produces. “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” (Luke 6:45) “A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.” (Matthew 7:18) Jesus is not teaching here of coercion, but is simply speaking of the necessity of producing that which is according to nature.
Likewise, we do not teach that men are coerced by outside forces- though we do not entirely dismiss the fact that outside influences play a huge part in the decisions we make. God uses various means to fulfill His purposes, and this we do not deny. But in no way do Calvinists teach that men are merely robots or puppets on strings as some would accuse us to believe. Rather, we say with Jesus that men’s choices are determined by their natures, just as a tree’s fruit will be determined by the type and the quality of the tree. This is clearly what our Lord consistently taught. “O generation of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.” (Matthew 12:34)
What we must continue to communicate to our Pastors and teachers is that all men without exception are “by nature children of wrath” - (Ephesians 2:3) Before conversion, all men are fallen, depraved, and spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:5, Colossians 2:13). We have corrupted hearts (Genesis 6:5, Jeremiah 17:9) and corrupted minds (Romans 1:28, Colossians 1:21). The Bible plainly teaches that by nature we are at enmity with God and hostile toward the gospel (Romans 8:7, 8). And that therefore, since we are bound to act and to choose according to our natures – we need to explain to them where that actually leaves us.
It leaves us in desperate need of a Savior; one who can actually save us, not merely “invite” us to be saved.
So is our problem that we need to be free to choose? No of course not, we are already free to choose. The problem then, is not so much of what we do, as it is of what we are. This is the real issue. We choose to sin because we are sinners, and not the other way around. And so what we really need is - not to be free to choose, but to be freed from the bondage of our sinful natures! Plain and simple. We need to be transformed by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit; that is - we need to be born again; having our fallen and depraved natures supernaturally renovated, and our blind eyes opened to the glory of the sovereign Son of God.
*I know that this is only an introduction to a very important discussion- but please ponder these truths and look up each of these passages to see for yourself whether I have exagerated.
Hopefully this will stimulate some good thought, and we can move on to expound the Doctrine of Monergistic Regeneration-
This is the heart of the Five Points- for when God saves- He saves alone- (There are no Co-Redeemers in the Kingdom of Heaven). To God ALONE be the Glory- now and forever!
God bless you all!
C
Crusador
Guest
Actually the word “men” is not in the original Geek; so it very well may be “all” in the sense of Gentiles as well as Jews; but there is no reason to understand that it must mean every single individual without exception.
When “all” is used in the New Testament- it rarely means ALL without exception.
Normally it means ALL nations, ALL types of men, ALL men without national or ethnic distinction- but not ALL men without a single exception. Just thought I’d shed some light on this matter- since I have done an extensive word-study on the terms “all” “world” “all men” and “the whole world” - etc.
No need to get upset- but these are the conclusions of diligent study- hope you all continue to search the Scriptures! God bless you!
S
sandusky
Guest
Good Post. :tiphat:
R
Reformed
Guest
Why Jesus spoke is parables is not a man-made riddle. The disciples specifically asked Jesus why He spoke in parables. If you don’t want to search the Scriptures for yourself, I can understand that position.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
This isn’t about ease, it is about truth. Show me where the OT Sacrifices were said to have been the objects of wrath and/or had punishment transferred to the animal.It is the MODE of the appeasing that is the issue. Appeasing God’s wrath does not require it be emptied on someone else.
If a child breaks his dad’s window and deserves a beating, it does not follow that the wife can take that beating instead, rather the wrath can be appeased through acts of love around the home so in the end nobody gets a beating.
Christ’s life of perfect love atoned for the sins of the world, He did not have to stand in our place and receive divine chastisement. This verse proves that sin can be atoned for in another way than Penal Substitution thinks.
That is because life has value, the value is not in that something living gets to die. As for Is 53, it must be interpreted in light of how the NT unfolds.
My point is that none of these offerings involved transferring punishment, in fact the fact grain offerings can be accepted in place of animal offerings (for those too poor for animals) further hurts the penal substitution model.
Irrelevant. The Passover Lamb was not punished.
No. A DEBT is NOT forgiven when someone PAYS it. Forgiving a debt means to drop it, not have it payed.
All I was doing was giving a clear example of what it means to forgive a debt.
No, what you propose is heretical and blasphemous.
R
Reformed
Guest
There is general (natural revelation) and special revelation (Jesus Christ). Are you saying people can be saved from the light of natural revelation? Before you answer, please study Romans chapter one in regards to general revelation (Psalm 19) as being a saving revelation. If we can be saved by the light of general (universal revelation) in what God has made, then why the incarnation and the cross? Help me understand your interpertation of “the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men” together with Romans 10. If saving news has appeared to all men, why do we need missionaries? Are sinners condemned before hearing the good news of Jesus Christ? Please read John 3 for the biblical answer.
The Message of Salvation to All
5 For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. 6 But the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) 7 or “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? [3] And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
18 But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for
“Their voice has gone out to all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world.”
19 But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says,
“I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation;
with a foolish nation I will make you angry.”
20 Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,
“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.”
21 But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.” - Rom 10
Titus 2 in context:
2:1 But as for you, teach what accords with sound [1] doctrine. 2 Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness. 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, 4 and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. 6 Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled. 7 Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, 8 and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us. 9 Slaves [2] are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, 10 not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
quodlibet.net/hall-sacrifice.shtml
This has a full discussion of the topic as well as scriptural references.
C
Crusador
Guest
I beleive his point is simple. If Jesus truly wanted to save everybody- he would have spoken in plain language, and not concealed his speech through parables. He asked you why you thought Jesus spoke in parables- well the Scriptures are clear.
So I have provided the text for you- (in each synoptic Gospel)
ENJOY . . .
(Matthew 13:10-15)
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
(Mark 4:10-12)
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. 11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: 12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
(Luke 8:9, 10)
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
Contarini did a fine job addressing this post, but it is important enough that I repeat much of it.
You are speaking as someone with Luther Glasses on, much of what you say is non-sequitor and, to be perfectly honest, no basis in Scripture.
Your proposition above is illogical. NOTHING necessitates God’s wrath poured out on Jesus OR us anymore than a raped woman’s anger either needs to be taken out on on the criminal OR her infant (via an abortion).
The suggestion that the real problem is draining God’s wrath at the expense of an innocent person is the un-Christian principal that the end justifies the means.
Does God EVER in the Bible pour out his wrath on an innocent person?
No, for that destroys God’s mercy at its very core, mercy ceases to exist.
LOL! And what would you call a judge that said “you rapist can go free, and innocent Bob will take the electric chair in your place.” How’s that judge? THAT is precisely what you advocate.
This is pretty laughable considering your definition of “justice.”
If this is STRICTLY a legal proceeding, then the guilty man can NEVER get off the hook. THAT is logic plain and simple. That is one of the serious flaws with Protestants forcing the issue of justification into a strictly legal context.
Wake up call. Forgiving and Punishing are opposites, if someone receives that wrath then it wasn’t forgiven, any more than paying off a debt can be called debt-forgiveness. You are thinking with misconceptions of Luther and reading these things into the text.
Your “solution” of having God’s wrath appeased in this manner is hardly logical or bibilcal.
See that word “forbearance” there? It means God MERCIFULLY did not destroy Adam on the spot, but rather let him and man live that a plan of salvation could be made. THAT is forgiveness and it was the driving force behind the cross, and that has no place in a legal context. This propitation was not God saving by penal substitution, but by atoning for sin in the model of Prov 16:6 which Christ was the epitome of that teaching.
The Bible says nothing about our sin being imputed to Christ, this is a very key teaching for Protestants, but it is unbibilcal. I would say the most important passage for Protestants is 2 Cor 5:21, yet it does not say what they think it does. The “curse” of someone on a tree that Paul talks about is the curse of a humiliating death, not the Nestorian type curse of divine chastisement.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
That article does not provide the Scriptural references for penal substitution. It reads this into the Bible with its Luther Glasses when the plain fact is the OT sacrifices never were set up that way. It had a lot of good information, but the penal sub aspect was unsubstantiated.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
If you don’t want to search the Scriptures for yourself, I can understand that position.
It may never cease to amaze me that some Protestants have that other people have never read Scripture. This delusion is terribly compromising effective communication in this conversation.
R
RobHom
Guest
Have you ever stopped to consider that you are really engaged with a party who is having a very one-sided argument with themself, and you are more or less having a one sided conversation with yourself?..Reformed isn’t actually interested in having a “conversation”, he is only interested in regurgitating the the same foul tripe redundantly. You could prove him 100% wrong…and he would just continue without a hiccup. I sometimes wonder if Reformed is little more than a “bot”.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Yes, the word translated for “men” is in there. It is ἄνθρωπος, word #444 in Strong’s Greek Lexicon.
Additionally, no, the word “all” does not always mean “all.” However, in this conversation, there are defenders of Calvin’s position that only the elect are given grace by God, and the reprobate are never given the grace to be saved. So if the word “all” here is only referring to the elect, then it is referring to what is described as the “few who enter the narrow gate.” (Mt 7:14). That renders this either a highly improbable interpretation of the word “all” or a completely untenable one. The verse would instead read, “for the grace of God has appeared to a few.”
Contrary to this notion of God withholding grace to some of mankind are these examples, some of which I cited earlier to no avail:
Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
1 Timothy 2:3-4 This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved…
Romans 11:32 For God delivered all to disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all.Everyone has a chance to be saved. Although his exegesis remains absent, our good brother, Reformed, has apparently pitted the analogy of the potter in conflict with these verses and Christ’s mission.
There are at least three reasons why Romans 9 cannot not trump the verses I have cited. The first, is Paul’s musing of the phrases “what if God” made people for good or some for destruction (e.g. v. 22). By this hypothetical language, He simply demonstrates who is in command. The point being no one can supersede His will.
The second is because no two Scriptures cannot conflict. They all must be harmonized.
The third is what I have been articulating for a number of posts now, which is the God’s foreknowledge recognizing in advance from the beginning of time, who would cooperate with His grace and who wouldn’t. Those whom He “foreknew” would cooperate therefore were His “predestined.” (e.g. 1 chapter earlier, Rm 8:29). And thus, in Romans 9, those whom He foreknew to cooperate correspond to the noble (v. 21) and the those whom He foreknew to not freely cooperate still entered time and served “dishonorable” purposes. The analogy of the clay cannot go so far as to equate man as a completely passive, inanimate blob with no free will. To take the analogy that far would also be to contradict Scripture, especially since Calvinism teaches that those who go to hell go there of their own fault.
No matter how you slice the chapter, it does not refute, but rather is harmonized with, the rest of Scripture, that demonstrates God wills the salvation of all and so provides grace to all.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
First question, as a sola scripturist, perhaps you can first show “natural” and “special” revelation in Scripture. But of course, one who was saved by the grace given them apart from hearing the formal Word of God is not saved in the normal capacity. Yet since Christ is still the source of all grace, it is still by Him that the ignorant are saved. The Spirit is not limited. It is no doubt more of a challenge to grasp Christ for those ignorant of the Word in this way, thus we must evangelize all men, as God wills and has commanded.
Second question…because the Cross is what allows saving grace to enter any of us.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Part of articulating a response is also good for me. And it also may be very helpful to others as there are a lot of “lurkers” out there who read threads and may not know what might be the answer to a question, even if it be a specious question or challenge. Don’t worr, I do not last long in looooong conversations that go nowhere. I think we are on the brink of recycling soon…
- Status