Are there any Calvinists on this forum?

[sandusky]

migurl:

In order to exist in this world do I have to Love God? No. I may not be happy, but I still exist. How would you like to be surrounded by people who are forced to care for you and do what you ask? Wouldn’t you prefer to be with people who choose out of love and compassion to do things for you because it brings you happiness and pleasure?

Are you going to answer the questions I posed in post #134?

 

[sandusky]

Philthy:

Hi Sandusky! I have to strongly disagree with your conclusion here. God’s offer in Catholic Theology is for all to be saved and he makes that offer to all people - it is simply a question of accepting the gift…We don’t deserve to be offered the gift and we could not attain salvation without Gods initiative, but God so loved the world that he gave his only son so that WHOEVER believes in him may have eternal life. There is no dilemma.

Phil

I liked the BULL beginning better.

The dilemma is the same. God has the power to save all. The reason for His not doing so is not the issue. Regardless of the system, God has the power to save all, and he doesn’t. It is the same dilemma.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

Are you admitting that you believe that men and angels have free will? Did Lucifer choose to be disobedient to God’s will? Did Adam and Eve choose to be disobedient to God’s will? Can a Christian choose to be disobedient to God’s will?

Yes, and with the angels, the elect angels did not fall.

Matt16_18:

A Christian can choose to sin because God has given him the freedom to choose life or death.

No. A regenerate Christian has already chosen and received eternal life.

Matt16_18:

A man is damned by his own free choice, not by what God withholds from him.

A man is damned because he will not believe.

Matt16_18:

You have been assiduously avoiding the question of why a Calvinist would even bother sharing the Gospel.

See post #85.

 

[migurl]

sandusky:

I liked the BULL beginning better.

The dilemma is the same. God has the power to save all. The reason for His not doing so is not the issue. Regardless of the system, God has the power to save all, and he doesn’t. It is the same dilemma.

FREE WILL! God gives us the ability to choose. Again I say why would you want to surround yoursefl with those forced to love you? God loves us so much that He is willing to accept that some people do not love Him as He wishes. Does a parent have the right to force their child to stay with them forever? No. The child chooses, their choice may be right or wrong, but it is their choice.
As for the answer to post 134, I have it, but I have to be sure to get the quote exact, that will take me a minute given the fact that I am babysitting at the moment.

 

[Lazerlike42]

sandusky:

I am aware of what you were doing.

What I told you about 1 Corinthians, applies to Peter also. Perhaps that is why God was delaying, not so all men would repent, because they won’t, but so that those who were His, then and in the future, who had not yet repented, many of whom had not been born, would be brought in.

You want to clarify that?

 

[Lazerlike42]

No. A regenerate Christian has already chosen and received eternal life.

Therefore, whoever thinks he stands must be careful not to fall!

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky

I asked you three questionsid Lucifer choose to be disobedient to God’s will?

Did Adam and Eve choose to be disobedient to God’s will?

Can a Christian choose to be disobedient to God’s will?You have answered “yes” to all three questions. Here you agree that a Christian can choose to be disobedient to God’s will. Here you agree that a Christian has free will.

But you disagree with this statement: A Christian can choose to sin because God has given him the freedom to choose life or death.What are you trying to say? That a Christian can exercise his free will to choose to be sinful and disobey God’s will, but that the sin he chooses to commit can never damn him? That position would be antinomianism, and you claim not to be an antinomian heretic.

What is your point?

A man is damned because he will not believe.

An apostate is a Christian that once believed, and then at some later time has chosen not to believe. In the case of an apostate, it is certainly true that a man is damned because he will not believe. It is also why OSAS is heresy – OSAS makes the implicit claim that the sin of apostasy impossible for a Christian to commit – something that is clearly contradicted by scriptures. It is also absurd to claim that non-Christians can commit the sin of apostasy? What would a non-Christian apostatize from?

What is your point?

A regenerate Christian has already chosen and received eternal life.

Baptized infants don’t choose anything. But baptized infants are regenerated by the waters of Baptism. And, yes, they do have eternal life abiding within because of the regeneration. But a baptized infant can also grow up to be an apostate that suffers eternal damnation.

What is your point?

 

[norwester]

You have been assiduously avoiding the question of why a Calvinist would even bother sharing the Gospel.

because God commands him to

 

[Lazerlike42]

Why is God commanding Him to?

 

[Matt16_18]

Lazerlike42:

Go get a girl and drug her up until she loves you. Do you take comfort and joy in her love? In fact, I’d say that the idea of a lack of free will amounts to some sort of divine ruffies.

Divine ruffies! LOL.

Forcing a person to “love” you is rape, not love. God is not a rapist.

sandusky:

The dilemma is the same. God has the power to save all. The reason for His not doing so is not the issue. Regardless of the system, God has the power to save all, and he doesn’t. It is the same dilemma.

God is omnipotent – the Catholic Church agrees with that. But the fact that God is all powerful doesn’t mean that God can do anything. God cannot be both impotent and omnipotent at the same time. God can’t be a contradiction, and God can’t do something that requires a contradiction either. God’s actions towards man cannot be both just and unjust at the same time.

Salvation requires repentance by man, man’s true sorrow and contrition for his sins. If a man doesn’t repent out of his own free will, then he hasn’t repented at all. God can’t use his omnipotent power to force a man to be repentant against his will because such a thing would be coercion, not repentance. You have created a false dilemma.

If God doesn’t save someone, it is because he is always just and he cannot be unjust even even for a nanosecond. If a person does not want to use his free will to be repentant for his sins, then God cannot save that person, because to do so would be to violate God’s justice. That is why OSAS cannot be true. God cannot force an apostate Christian to become repentant for the sin of apostasy. If a Christian chooses to die unrepentant for the sin of apostasy, justice requires damnation for the sin.

No repentance, no salvation. Calvinists don’t get a free ride to be unrepentant for their sins.

migurl:

FREE WILL! God gives us the ability to choose. Again I say why would you want to surround yoursefl with those forced to love you?

How can real love be something that is forced on you by a being that is more powerful than you are? A forced love isn’t love at all – it is rape, it is either physical rape or spiritual rape. God is not a rapist.

 

[migurl]

not the answer for 134. BUT someone had said something about there not being any mention of Man’s free will in the Bible. explain this then please.

“Say not “it was God’s doing that I fell away”, for what He hates He does not do. Say not “It was He who set me astray”; for He has no need of wicked man. Abominable wickedness the Lord hates, He does not let it befall those who fear Him. When God, in the beginning, created man, He made him subject to his own free choice. If yuo choose, you can keep the commandments. It is loyalty to do His will. There are set before you fire and water; whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand. Before man are life and death, whichever he chooses shall be given him. The eyes of God see all He has made; He understands man’s every deed. No man does he command to sin, to non does he give strength for lies.” Sirach chapter 15 starting with verse 11.

 

[sandusky]

**Matt16_18

No more discussion until you answer these questions which you have been constantly avoiding:

From Post #104**

Matt16_18:

This is where you err in your understanding of covenant. You believe that you have a covenant with God, and this covenant is like a legal contract that gives you a guaranteed assurance that you will preserve unto the end… and you have absolutely no way of knowing if you will persevere unto the end.

John wrote his Gospel so the believing one could know that he had eternal life (Jn 20:31); John wrote his first epistle so the believing one could know that he had eternal life. Who is right, you, or John? Also, you said that

Matt16_18:

The New Covenant is not a legal contract between you and God that gives you a lock on heaven…

The formalization of contract in the time of Christ was done by placing a seal upon the document. A seal was also placed upon a document showing that the one possessing the sealed document owned the contents set forth in the document. Paul speaks of the believer being sealed with/by the Holy Spirit, as an earnest, a down payment, a guarantee (Rom 8:16;
2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). Who is right, you, or Paul?

From Post
#107

Matt16_18:

The believing Christian does have eternal life abiding within. But a Christian can become an apostate (i.e. a person that no longer believes). An apostate has no eternal life abiding within. Even Calvin believed that a Christian that lost his faith would be damned.

There is NOTHING in scriptures that supports the OSAS heresy.

By definition, the elect believer is always believing. As I have said, he does so not of his own ability, but on the ability of God to persevere, and sustain Him.

Philippians 1:6
6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

Is Paul mistaken in his statement?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

sandusky:

Cont from post #100

The language speaks to a final and full revelation. With the death of Christ and the Apostles, God is done talking. Christ is the pinnacle, and the end of revelation. When the apostles had finished writing down their accounts and were taken home, God’s revelation was complete. I do not deny that many have seen apparitions; I do deny that they are from God. God now speaks only through His written word.

The argument that there was no Bible until the church compiled it is humorous. To say that the churches of the day did not have access to what the apostles had written is false; to say that there was no Scripture until it was canonized is false. God superintended the writers of the Scripture; God superintended the canonizing of its finished form. The writings of the N.T. didn’t suddenly appear for canonization; they were alive and well, and circulating among the early churches. Today we have in excess of 20,000 extant manuscripts. The early churches certainly had access to the writings, and understood their authenticity. The bottom line is that God ensures that His have the truth.

In the Gospels, long before they bore the imprimatur of the church, Jesus held the Jews accountable for knowing the written word of God. “Have you not heard?” he asked, “have you not read?” he inquired.

God’s people know His words without anyone’s official pronouncement (Jn 10:27).

In his book, Dogmatic Theology for the Laity, (Rockford, IL: Tan Books, 1967), p. 29, Matthias Premm says, “…the teaching office of the Church is more important than the Bible…In other words: The immediate and highest rule of faith is the living office of the Church.” (Ital. mine).

That is inverse to the declaration of God’s Word.

What does the whole passage say ? As it stands, that is pretty awful ​

 

[StCsDavid]

sandusky:

Scripture is clear about God’s perseverance of the elect to glorification. Scripture is equally clear that one can know that one is saved.

Name me three ways that one knows one is saved that are not in the realm of subjective opinion.

sandusky:

In the O.T., God chose Israel as His people…(I’ll respond to the rest of the paragraphs you wrote.)

Consider this…
Adam & Eve…God makes a covenant with humanity beginning with its first two incarnations
Noah…God makes a covenant with a family
Abraham…God makes a covenant with a tribe
Moses…God makes a covenant with a race
David…God makes a covenant with a nation
Christ…God makes a covenant with all of humanity

Do you see the pattern of ever increasing scope of God’s covenants? It seems out of character that all of sudden God would make this covenant with a handful of these self-proclaimed “elect.”

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Matt16_18:

Are you admitting that you believe that men and angels have free will? Did Lucifer choose to be disobedient to God’s will? Did Adam and Eve choose to be disobedient to God’s will? Can a Christian choose to be disobedient to God’s will?

Does a Christian (or any man on earth) have the absolute freedom to choose not to obey the law of gravity? Of course not.

In regard to our our salvation, freedom of the will has to do with the MORAL choices that we make. Does a Christian have the freedom to make moral choices? Yes, he does. A Christian can freely choose obedience to God - he can choose to obey God’s commandments. He has that freedom because the grace of God gives him that freedom.

Can a Christian choose disobedience to God’s will and choose to disobey his commandments? Yes he can. God’s grace did not turn the Christian into a holy meat robot that can ONLY be obedient to God. A Christian can choose to sin because God has given him the freedom to choose life or death.I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life …

Deut. 30:19

There is a huge difference between your hyper-Calvinism and Catholicism. Catholics believe exactly what is written in scripture - that God desires all men to come to repentance. That God desires all men to be saved. That the atoning sacrifice of Jesus was offered not just for the sins of the Christians, but for the sins of the whole world. That is why Catholic go out and preach the Good News to all nations. It is preached so that all men might be saved. Do all men respond to grace? Not all, but if men are damned, it isn’t because God withheld a fictitious “irresistible” grace from them. A man is damned by his own free choice, not by what God withholds from him.

You have been assiduously avoiding the question of why a Calvinist would even bother sharing the Gospel. If Calvinists believe that most men are predestined for damnation, then what is the point of bringing the Gospel to such men? The damned were created for Hell by God, and even if they wanted to be saved by the precious blood of Jesus, God would send them to Hell anyway.

[re-interruption]​

The way to answer that, is to think of intercessory prayer (say) - the predestination of those preached to becomes effectual for them, when & because they are preached to; the preaching is the instrumental cause whereby the electing choice of God becomes a reality for those elected persons.

Just as our obedient prayers of intercessions bring about the good which God* could do* independently of them, but, in fact, does not do independently. We are sometimes part of the answer to our own prayers. So with Calvinists sharing the Gospel.

God does not call Christians so that they may live in idleness - far from it; He has a work to be done, for others, by them, to His Glory - He is the Lord of the harvest, they are among the workers. So they are definitely needed. After all, Christ is not a Spirit only: He has a Body, which needs to be exercised in doing His Will. ##

 

[Lazerlike42]

**
Philippians 1:6**
6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

Is Paul mistaken in his statement?

Philippians is my favorite disproof of OSAS. If you read 3:10-17, you will see that Paul himself is not sure that he will attain eternal life, even though he has already “been taken hold of by Christ Jesus.”

Being taken hold of by Christ Jesus would seem to me to be a decent way to speak of those who are elect. Nevertheless, though Paul be taken hold of, he is not sure he will make it.

 

[StCsDavid]

sandusky:

The language speaks to a final and full revelation. With the death of Christ and the Apostles, God is done talking. Christ is the pinnacle, and the end of revelation. When the apostles had finished writing down their accounts and were taken home, God’s revelation was complete. I do not deny that many have seen apparitions; I do deny that they are from God. God now speaks only through His written word.

I still don’t get how you derive that from that particular passage beyond applying your own personal spin. Same true for your opinion that God has not made private revelations since the Apostles penned their Gospels. Are all of these apparitions simply figments of imagination? Please don’t tell me they’re from Satan as they almost universally direct people to Christ. It sounds more like you don’t understand it; and since it doesn’t fit in your sola scriptura world it must not be real.

sandusky:

The argument that there was no Bible until the church compiled it is humorous. To say that the churches of the day did not have access to what the apostles had written is false; to say that there was no Scripture until it was canonized is false.

I didn’t say that. But the Gospels had not been written at the time this letter was written.

sandusky:

In the Gospels, long before they bore the imprimatur of the church, Jesus held the Jews accountable for knowing the written word of God. “Have you not heard?” he asked, “have you not read?” he inquired.

Was Christ not talking about the OT when he was addressing these Jews? Are you suggesting Christ was holding these Jews accountable for NT writings? Surely I misunderstand you there. No one denies that the writings circulated among the churches before the Catholic Church assembled them…and way before the Protestant “reformers” summarily dispensed of books that didn’t suit their cause.

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

By definition, the elect believer is always believing.

NOWHERE does scripture teacht that the “elect believer” can never commit the sin of apostasy. Scripture explicitly warns against Christians becoming apostates. Jesus warns that many would fall away. The OT warns against breaking the covenant. You are dead wrong to believe that Christians cannot be damned for committing the sin of unrepentant apostasy. And this is exactly why Calvinism is such dangerous heresy.

OSAS is the complete corruption of the Gospel.

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

Is Paul mistaken in his statement?

Paul is talking about the Christian virtue of HOPE, not some Calvinistic fantasy about “eternal security” for the elect. Paul is preaching that Christians can be confident that God will be faithful to his end of the covenant, and, if Christians are faithful to their end of the covenant, they have nothing to fear.

Paul is not teaching that Christians are guaranteed a place in Heaven because it is impossible for then to commit mortal sin, or that it is impossible for them to commit the sin of apostasy, or it is impossible for them to commit the unforgivable sin. Read all of Paul, instead of just wrenching a couple of verses of his out of context! Then read the Church Fathers. No Father of the Church ever taught OSAS.

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

John wrote his Gospel so the believing one could know that he had eternal life (Jn 20:31); John wrote his first epistle so the believing one could know that he had eternal life. Who is right, you, or John?

John is right and YOU are wrong. You teach that a Christian cannot lose the eternal life abiding within, and you contradict John when you do.

In John’s Gospel, Jesus teaches that he abides in us and we in him. John teaches that Jesus is our eternal life (1John 1:2) – John NEVER teaches that eternal life is a clause in a legal contract with God.

John teaches that that we can lose our abiding in Jesus - which is something you deny. Please take off your OSAS blinders and read John 15:1-10. Jesus teaches that he is the vine and the Christians are the branches. (This is a metaphor about Jesus abiding in us and we in him). Jesus teaches in the metaphor of the vine and the branches that God the Father prunes from the vine the branches that bear no fruit. These fruitless branches are gathered up and cast into the fire. This is the same thing that James teaches: belief that is fruitless is useless, because even demons believe and tremble.

John teaches that God is love. (1John 4:8 & 1John 4:16). John teaches that Christians must abide in love (God), and if a Christian abides in hate, he has no eternal life abiding within. He who does not love abides in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
1John 3:14-15 A Christian that hates his brother abides in death and has no eternal life abiding within. God is love, and a hater abides in hate not God. How much more explict can John be? Christians lose the eternal life abiding within by committing the mortal sin of hatred.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

sandusky-

Reconciling the Scriptures with a finite mind is not possible. God nowhere commands one to reconcile every antinomy found within Scripture, and there are many. Rather, He commands us to believe what He has said, even if we cannot resolve the conflict. That is faith.

This is the kind of talk I hear from all Calvinists, it is so disturbing, Im not attacking you here, but the idea that somehow Calvinism is 100% SURE it is interpreting and understanding things correctly it turns around and THROWS out talk like this at its opponents…and the Calvinist dont see anything wrong with it. What you conclude as irreconcilable “contradictions” could easily easily easily mean you yourself are misunderstanding something.

It is true that many go to hell, and that God could prevent that, and that He doesn’t. It is also true that God loves His creation

The problem is Calvinists refuse to even imagine there can be no contradiction, they cant imagine that there are answers to a lot of what they have questions on.

You will never be satisfied if you continually try reconcile each paradox. God has a redemptive love toward the elect alone, and a love a compassion expressed toward all of His creation.

I cant believe this, yet this is how they talk. Are you sure your open to other possible views? Many of the so called “paradoxes” are nothing more than results of refusal to even imagine there is something wrong with your views.

I’ll offer an antidote: Memorize Rom 8:33-36, and whenever you encounter an unresolved paradox, recite that verse and meditate on it. Pay particular attention to how unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways.

Also meditate on 2Peter3:
So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability.
You need to banish the idea that just because you see a “paradox” doesnt mean it is what it is, in many cases there is an explaination.

(also just I reminder I did get a chance to respond to your last post in my post 115)