Are there any Calvinists on this forum?

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

Q. 12 asserts that God has “unchangeably foreordained whatsoever comes to pass in time.”

Isaiah 46:10: Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’;

Matt16_18:

That means God is both the source of all good and the source of all evil in the world, since neither good nor evil comes into existence unless God wills it.

The assertion that God is the source of all evil in the world is outrageous blasphemy against God!

Proverbs 16:4 (NASB95)
4 The Lord has made everything for its own purpose, Even the wicked for the day of evil.

Isaiah 45:7 (NASB95)
7 The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these.

Amos 3:6 (NASB95)
6 If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has not the Lord done it?

In Is 45:7, the Hebrew word ra is translated calamity. Its root meaning is evil. In fact, 442 of the 600 plus times that the word is used in the O.T., it is translated evil. It is not blasphemy to speak the truth of God.

Scripture nowhere asserts that God is evil. Neither do any of the documents that you have cited. You are asserting your own wrong conclusion.

Matt16_18:

Q. 13 states that God has foreordained some men to eternal damnation for their sins. But if every evil that comes to pass in the world is because God has foreordained that evil, then the sin cannot be attributed to men.

How can a man be said to be committing a “transgression” against the law of God if all men, both good and evil, are merely being obedient to what God has willed to foreordain?

What you are saying then is why does God find fault? After all, who has resisted His will?

Paul has anticipated that question:

Romans 9:19-22 (NASB95)
*19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” *

Paul has an answer to that:

20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Matt16_18:

It is utter nonsense to assert God is just in eternally punishing men for doing what God has foreordained.

Do you now see that your assertions are already stated and answered in Scripture? In light of Rom 9:19-22, will you continue to maintain that it is utter nonsense to assert that God is eternally punishing men for doing what He has foreordained?

 

[sandusky]

dts:

Calvin denied that the sacraments, in and of themselves, bestow grace. He held that they must be received in faith.

Calvin also only recognized two sacraments: The Lord’s Supper, and Baptism.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

God is omniscient - God had foreknowledge that Adam and Eve would be disobedient. There is a very great difference between asserting that God foreknew that Adam and Eve would be disobedient, and asserting that God foreordained that Adam and Eve would be disobedient.

If correct, your assertion would mean that God is The Contingent God, rather than The Sovereign God, as He presents Himself in Scripture.

 

[Matt16_18]

norwester:

The point we would disagree is whether God’s drawing is always effectual.

God created Adam and Eve in a state of sanctifying grace, in a state where they were free from all sin. God drew Adam and Eve to himself by his gratuitous gift of grace. In spite of all the blessings that Adam and Eve received, they were capable of resisting the call of grace – and they did this when they were free from all concupiscence.

You admit that you sin. Apparently, even the regenerated elect can be disobedient to God’s will, just as Adam and Eve could be disobedient to God while they were in a state of grace.

Could you please explain to me how Calvinists answers these questions:

**Did God foreordain that Adam and Eve commit the sin of disobedience to his will?

Does God foreordain that the regenerated elect commit sins of disobedience to his will?

Is it possible for the elect to resist God’s sufficient grace?** “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”
2Cor. 12:9

Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him. Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.
James 1:12-15

No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.
1Cor. 10-13

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

Do you now see that your assertions are already stated and answered in Scripture?

What I see is that you don’t understand the scriptures that you quote. God is certainly sovereign. The sovereign Lord of all creation has decided to give men and angels the gift of free will without consulting angels and men to see if they wanted to have this gift!

If angels and men abuse their free will, God does not cease to be the sovereign Lord of all creation. God will punish the angels and men that have abused their free will to reject the God’s gift of grace, and he will do this when disobedient men and angels least expect it. At the final judgement, even the damned will bend their knee and acknowledge that Jesus is Lord before they are cast into the lake of fire.

 

[sandusky]

StCsDavid:

The problem I have with your position, friend, is this notion that God created most people with the intent of sending them to Hell and that they have not hope of attaining salvation regardless of their belief in Christ.

Romans 9:21-22
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonor?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

In v22, the “What if God,” in the Greek construction is an affirmation of something. It is not a hypothetical. To be properly understood in English, “What if God,” is better rendered, “But God.” In other words, what follows in the verse, is what God did. And v21 says that God has the right to do that.

StCsDavid:

That just really seems to be an egocentric position.

I am not clear on that. Are you saying that my position is egocentric?

StCsDavid:

Do you posit that only the elect have this belief in Christ?

There are different kinds of belief in Christ. One is to salvation (Eph 2:8ff); one is not, but is rather a said, or false faith (Jas 2:14, 19). There are also two kinds of repentance. One is by the will of God, and leads to salvation, the other is of the world (remorse), and leads to destruction (2 Cor 7:8-10).

StCsDavid:

So if you weren’t one of the elect you wouldn’t believe in Christ in the first place?

The belief that leads to salvation is a gift of God, given by God (Eph 2:8ff). If one is not of the elect, his faith is not from God, and therefore, is not a faith that leads to salvation; it is a false, or said faith.

StCsDavid:

Would a bushman in Africa who never hears the Gospel likely be one of the elect?

I can think of nowhere in the Scripture, where God has obligated Himself to herald the Gospel to everyone. The great commission in Mt 28, tells us to make disciples of all the nations. The sense of it is without distinction, not without exception. I am certain, that there are many who have perished who have never heard the Gospel. How God resolves that is something He simply does not reveal to us.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

What I see is that you don’t understand the scriptures that you quote.

Using the Scriptures that I have quoted, show me where I err.

Matt16_18:

The sovereign Lord of all creation has decided to give men and angels the gift of free will…

Support that assertion, please.

You have not answered my question: In light of Rom 9:19-22, will you continue to maintain that it is utter nonsense to assert that God is eternally punishing men for doing what He has foreordained?

 

[Philthy]

sandusky:

Where is it said that Christ came to save all men?

The Lord does not wish that any should perish (2Pet3:9)
Stated in the affirmative:

• God wishes all to be saved
• Salvation required Christ
• Therefore, Christ came to save all men

Pretty simple.

sandusky:

Romans 8:29-30 (NASB95)
*29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; *
30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. A statement regarding election. Notice the verb tenses.

Question: Who are those he foreknew? You need to understand that before we can worry about verb tenses…

Romans 11:1-2 "…has God rejected his people? Of course not! I am an Israelite…God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew."

Answer: The people of Israel. Most of Romans 10 and 11 seems to be dealing with the reality that ALL people are open to God through Christ - not JUST Jews, but Greeks also. In addition, Paul clarifies that JEWS are not excluded either (Rom 11-2). It is not a discussion of he how or when of salvation through election.
QUOTE=sandusky]
Ephesians 1:4-6 (NASB95)
*4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love *
*5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, *
6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
That is a statement as to election/predestination. Do you deny election/predestination?

My bible says “destined” in verse 5 vs predestined - same thing?
That paragraph in no way says that some are predestined and some are not. It could be universally applied to all mankind after the Resurrection.
As to your question, I don’t deny or affirm election - its completely irrelevent really. It’s a useless concept that has absolutely no significance for either the elect or the reprobate as far I can tell. I mean according to calvinists, either your elect or not and there isn’t a thing to do about it. The only potential usefulness of the doctrine is in atttacking the Church.

sandusky:

Matthew 1:21 (NASB95)
*21 “She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” *

Which people did Jesus come to save? He came to save His people. Who are His people?

The Israelites - see above

sandusky:

John 6:37-39 (NASB95)
*37 “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. *
*38 “For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. *
39 “This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.

That passage is further support for election.

Yup. but it doesn’t necessitate that all who are saved are “predestined” in the manner you would suggest. Some who achieve eternal salvation after judgement may be predestined, and
may not be. Either way God wishes all men to be saved.

sandusky:

That is an unbiblical statement. There is no such thing as luck in God’s economy. One is saved by God’s mercy, and not luck.

Its tough when things start falling apart - isn’t it? If God has predestined some for heaven and some for hell when in fact we all deserve hell; and if those who are saved are saved by His Mercy for no other reason other than His Will, then luck is indeed the accurate term. One is saved by Gods mercy of course, but who gets his mercy is, in fact, luck according to your model of predestination. Unless you are prepared to admit that those who are saved are somehow more deserving BY VIRTUE OF SOMETHING THEY ACCOMPLISHED DURING LIFE. Are you prepared to admit that? You can’t admit that the elect have had anything to do with being elect otherwise you’d deny Grace. Ergo, luck is a perfect description.

sandusky:

I do not see where understanding and proclaiming God’s truth is arrogant, and lacking in humility.

It’s not. It’s believing that you have the authority to do so that’s arrogant and lacking in humility. Im not saying you believe that or anything - just clarifying the actual topic. No one has a problem with the proclamation of the Truth…
Phil

 

[sandusky]

Philthy:

The Lord does not wish that any should perish (2Pet3:9)
Stated in the affirmative:
• God wishes all to be saved
• Salvation required Christ
• Therefore, Christ came to save all men
Pretty simple.

That is a great answer to the question, “Does God desire all men to be saved?” However, that is not what I asked.

I’ll ask again: where is it said that Christ came to save all men?

Philthy:

Question: Who are those he foreknew? You need to understand that before we can worry about verb tenses…

Romans 11:1-2 “…has God rejected his people? Of course not! I am an Israelite…God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.”

Answer: The people of Israel. Most of Romans 10 and 11 seems to be dealing with the reality that ALL people are open to God through Christ - not JUST Jews, but Greeks also. In addition, Paul clarifies that JEWS are not excluded either (Rom 11-2). It is not a discussion of he how or when of salvation through election.

Right. Those He foreknew are the elect who have been predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son.

Philthy:

My bible says “destined” in verse 5 vs predestined - same thing?

It is “predestined.” In the Greek, “proordizo.” Predestined.

Philthy:

That paragraph in no way says that some are predestined and some are not.

Well, then, if in saying that some have been predestined, it doesn’t really mean that some have been predestined, what does it mean when it says that some have been predestined?

Philthy:

It could be universally applied to all mankind after the Resurrection.

But, it is not. It speaks of a specific group of people. Those chosen in Christ, and predestined to be conformed to Christ’s image, and that, before the foundation of the world.

Philthy:

As to your question, I don’t deny or affirm election - its completely irrelevent really.

So, God’s word in this case is irrelevant. Are there any other areas of Scripture that you find irrelevant?

Philthy:

Yup. but it doesn’t necessitate that all who are saved are “predestined” in the manner you would suggest.

Then in what manner does it necessitate that all who are saved are “predestined?”

Philthy:

Some who achieve eternal salvation after judgement may be predestined, and may not be.

What? After someone is judged, he may be predestined? What judgment are you talking about?

Philthy:

Its tough when things start falling apart - isn’t it? If God has predestined some for heaven and some for hell when in fact we all deserve hell; and if those who are saved are saved by His Mercy for no other reason other than His Will, then luck is indeed the accurate term. One is saved by Gods mercy of course, but who gets his mercy is, in fact, luck according to your model of predestination. Unless you are prepared to admit that those who are saved are somehow more deserving BY VIRTUE OF SOMETHING THEY ACCOMPLISHED DURING LIFE. Are you prepared to admit that? You can’t admit that the elect have had anything to do with being elect otherwise you’d deny Grace. Ergo, luck is a perfect description.

Well, Philthy, I guess you better keep your fingers crossed.

 

[Matt16_18]

norwester:

Calvinists hold that man has “total depravity” but that is not “utter depravity”. We do hold that man has some free will, but not total free will.

As you can see, Sandusky believes that neither men nor angels have any free will whatsoever.

According to Sandusky, Calvinism teaches that if a man rapes a woman, the man is merely being obedient to what God has willed for that man. God didn’t just have omniscient foreknowledge of this horrible sin, God manifested his omnipotence and caused the rape to occur.

Norwester, I would like to know your opinion on this. Is Sandusky’s understanding of Calvinsm typical of the Calvinists that you personally know? I ask you this because you are one of the few Calvinists that I have ever encountered on the internet that believes men and women have free will, and that men can freely choose to commit sinful acts of disobedience against God’s will.

Do most Calvinists really believe that God is the cause of all that is evil, sick and depraved in the world?

 

[AquinasXVI]

Sandusky and Norwester:

Did it ever occur to you that all you believe is hinging on the opinion of man that was born well over a millenium after Christ came, and if Calvin was never born, you won’t be Calvinist today?

Calvin’s thoughts and catechisis were original to him. His main position on salvation was never a part of the landscape of Christianity until he came into the picture.

Not trying to win an argument, just asking a question.

in XT.

 

[Matt16_18]

AquinasXVI:

Sandusky and Norwester …

I don’t think that it is fair to compare norwester’s understanding of Calvinism with the monstrosity that Sandusky’s presents as Calvinism.

It is Sandusky’s version of “Calvinism” that most Catholics find so hideously repulsive. Whether Sandusky’s version of Calvinism is the most common understanding of Calvinism is something I would sincerely like to know.

Unfortunately, Sandusky’s man-has-no-free-will version of Calvinism is the one that I most frequently see presented on both the Internet and on the Protestant radio stations that have Calvinist preachers. In the no-free-will version of Calvinism, God has decided by an act of his sovereign will to bring forth a depraved race of beings, the majority of which have been positively predestined for torment in the eternal fires of hell. (Not all men and women are damned, of course, because God arbitrarily decides to force irresistible grace on the lucky few chosen to be the “elect”.) Before the unlucky are condemned to eternity in hell, the damned souls are forced by God to commit the acts of evil that God has willed to unleash upon the earth.

In some incomprehensible manner, God is being “just” in punishing the damned souls for being perfectly obedient to God’s will.

 

[StCsDavid]

sandusky:

Romans 9

That’s quite a leap you make there. It really only proves that God has the right to do whatever he pleases, which is something I totally agree with. It in no way clearly defines that most of the folks God creates are going to Hell. That’s a spin you (or John Knox, Calvin, whomever) have applied to it in an effort to make your sola scriptura philosophy some how pan out. By the way, where in the bible does it say that you should use it and only it as your basis of belief?

sandusky:

I am not clear on that. Are you saying that my position is egocentric?

I’m more correctly stating that Calvanism is egocentric. It’s all about “me” being selected as one of the elect…perhaps you are humbled by that…perhaps you are proud of that…perhaps you are high and mighty about that…but nevertheless…it’s all about the “me,” which goes against Christ’s message for us to die to ourselves.

sandusky:

There are different kinds of belief in Christ. One is to salvation (Eph 2:8ff); one is not, but is rather a said, or false faith (Jas 2:14, 19). There are also two kinds of repentance. One is by the will of God, and leads to salvation, the other is of the world (remorse), and leads to destruction (2 Cor 7:8-10).

The belief that leads to salvation is a gift of God, given by God (Eph 2:8ff). If one is not of the elect, his faith is not from God, and therefore, is not a faith that leads to salvation; it is a false, or said faith.

So how does one know whether one’s faith is this gift from God or whether one is caught up in a false faith? As your sacraments are only symbols of grace, how do you know you’ve received it? The only way I can think of is you simply convince yourself that you have…again, egocentrism.

I can think of nowhere in the Scripture, where God has obligated Himself to herald the Gospel to everyone. The great commission in Mt 28, tells us to make disciples of all the nations. I’m still confused as to why a Calvinist would deem this even necessary since he concludes that he is one of the elect. Surely he doesn’t believe he can convert anyone. That’s already been taken care of by God’s predetermination as to who His people will be. What is it he hopes to achieve in the great commission of Mt28? So far as I have been able to determine by your selective, fragmented use of scripture…he is nothing more than an innocent bystander whom God chose to be one of the elect. None of this is ever mentioned by the revelations that have been made public by a multitude of saints. None of this has been mentioned by our Blessed Mother in any of her aparitions. Did Calvin have a divine revelation? I’m serious when I ask that as I don’t know the basis for his understanding other than he simply thought it up as he went.

 

[gap51]

As an aside:

When God sent Jonah to the Ninevites was it ***predestined ***that He would destroy their city (because of their wickedness) and at the same instant had ***foreknowledge ***that he would spare them because they would repent? Sort of free-will here isn’t it!

 

[sandusky]

AquinasXVI:

Sandusky and Norwester:

Did it ever occur to you that all you believe is hinging on the opinion of man that was born well over a millenium after Christ came, and if Calvin was never born, you won’t be Calvinist today?

Calvin’s thoughts and catechisis were original to him. His main position on salvation was never a part of the landscape of Christianity until he came into the picture.

Not trying to win an argument, just asking a question.

in XT.

Has it ever occurred to you, that the faith that I hold is based upon the teachings of Jesus and His disciples. Your inference that my hope is in Calvin is silly, to say the least. Calvin was a brilliant theologian, much maligned by those who have never read him. As with everyone, he had his flaws, but his exegesis is superb.

As far as your statement that Calvin’s “position on salvation was never a part of the landscape of Christianity until he came into the picture,” you are mistaken. With respect to predestination, irresistible grace, and such, he has much in common with Augustine, whose theology was quashed by Gregory, called the great, who introduced the idea of purgatory, and the mass as sacrifice.

Gregory lived in a time of obscurantism, superstition, and credulity, and to a degree he reflected his age, bringing such things into the church.

Did it ever occur to you, that had it not been for Constantine, whose effects on the church, though waning, are still felt, you would be some 1700 years closer to Apostolic Christianity, instead of being separated from it by a great chasm?

Paul, when he left Ephesus, prophesied that after his departure savage wolves would come in and not spare the flock. The corruption of the church was working even as the apostles still breathed.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

I don’t think that it is fair to compare norwester’s understanding of Calvinism with the monstrosity that Sandusky’s presents as Calvinism.

It is Sandusky’s version of “Calvinism” that most Catholics find so hideously repulsive. Whether Sandusky’s version of Calvinism is the most common understanding of Calvinism is something I would sincerely like to know.

Unfortunately, Sandusky’s man-has-no-free-will version of Calvinism is the one that I most frequently see presented on both the Internet and on the Protestant radio stations that have Calvinist preachers. In the no-free-will version of Calvinism, God has decided by an act of his sovereign will to bring forth a depraved race of beings, the majority of which have been positively predestined for torment in the eternal fires of hell. (Not all men and women are damned, of course, because God arbitrarily decides to force irresistible grace on the lucky few chosen to be the “elect”.) Before the unlucky are condemned to eternity in hell, the damned souls are forced by God to commit the acts of evil that God has willed to unleash upon the earth.

In some incomprehensible manner, God is being “just” in punishing the damned souls for being perfectly obedient to God’s will.

Your understanding is improving.

 

[sandusky]

gap51:

Sort of free-will here isn’t it!

This is a close of description of the freedom of man; it is sort of free-will, but not absolutely free.

 

[jpusateri]

sandusky:

The difference between the Catholic, and the Calvinist, is that the Catholic, though he will deny it, relies upon himself and external rituals for his salvation, while the Calvinist knows that it is God who saves to the uttermost.

Perhaps this distinction is semantical, but, like a Catholic who relies on rituals and sacraments for salvation, the mountainclimber relies on his ROPE to save him. You need to understand that Catholics know that the rope is useless without being attached to a ROCK that is really what saves him!

 

[hilde_the_dog]

Calvin College graduate class of '88. Grew up in the TULIP (get the pun) capital of the US - Holland ,MI. (Yes they have a yearly tulip time festival) My grandfather used to make wooden shoes. You know what I joined the Catholic church three years ago - I never did like predestination. No I don’t believe God predestined my dog to get hit by that motorcycle. If any thing bad happened it was always “That was the Lord’s will”.

Having said that I will never forget infra versus supra lapsarianism or the bifurcation of reality discussions in class at Calvin.

Sandusky I hope you did not go to Hope. Maybe Dordt?

 

[AquinasXVI]

Sandusky:

Thanks for the staunch comments. It helped me understand where you’re coming from.

Find time to read Four Witnesses by Bennett. Christ the King Lord of History by Carroll, Founding of Christendom by Warren Carroll, Triumph by Crocker. These might give you a different take from your version of history.

Have a great day.

in XT.