Do Calvinists believe that God loves everyone? Or does he love only the elect?

[onemangang]

As do I!

Paul here is using the term sanctified, not in its ontological sense, but is referring to the break with love of sin and hatred towards God and His law that occurs at regeneration. He is exhorting the Corinthian disciples to live in accordance with their standing before God and their washing by the Spirit.

I used that reference because I believe they were regenerated by the washing of the Spirit in Baptism, past tense, and that they had under gone an ontological change in nature leaving an indelible mark or the soul. Thus the use of the Sanctified term prior to Justified, being that it was the Sanctifying grace they received from the Holy Spirit, that brought about there justification.

I do not presume to say that I will not fall away. My confidence rests in God’s promise to keep me in the one true faith unto life everlasting. Not in my own abilities or efforts.

As do Catholics in a sense. Yes I know that God will continue to keep me, and there is nothing I can do apart from Christ. There are no wages due for work performed as in strict merit! God doesn’t owe me anything. He will always provide the grace I need to turn towards Him in repentance, but will I? The difference we have is that I believe one can resist that grace or accept it.

Because it rests upon the merits and passion of Christ, which is enough for me to know that what He accomplished is enough to justify me.

But WILL He, can you KNOW that?

It is solely on the Work of Christ in Catholic Theology. There is no Strict Merit in Catholic Theology, whereas we can demand payment due, for work done! Christ has merited our Salvation by grace. We may differ on how that grace is delivered though!

I would not say about anyone that he must not have been saved in the first place. The only response we can have in those situations is to pray for them and try to love them enough to implore them to repent and believe the gospel. I do not know if that individual will not come back to the faith in 20 years. Those things aren’t for us to know.

Good to hear. I used to attend Evangelical services before Converting (re-verting) to Catholicism. There was a guy that attended that had been an on again, off again, meth addict for over 15 years, and the assistant pastor (a Calivinist) said " Man, he comes back he’s always on fire for the Lord, or so it would seem anyways, but he always goes back to the Meth, that’s where first love is, it just shows me that he’s never been saved" I’m glad to hear that isn’t the typical Calvinist view, because many Calvinist do espouse that. But some of the stuff people in the pews say in the Catholic Church is just way off too. Good thing Catholic theology isn’t defined by some of the folks in the pews!

 

[CopticChristian]

No, that is definitely not my understanding of Roman Catholic teaching. If I chafe at the misrepresentation of my own beliefs, I am forced to chafe at them when they occur towards those I disagree with as well. I was responding to a statement by a poster, and not attempting to portray what Rome teaches on the subject.

Iggy,

Good. This is one point of agreement. God saves and God alone saves however you wish to name it, ie salvation, saved, etc…now so I can explore with you the notion of the paradigm I presented to you concerning salvation as I posted in post #39 and you responded in post #40. Consider the following for me…

I believe in the Conscious mind and the Subconscious mind. The Conscious mind and Subconscious mind are one. We are aware of what we are conscious of and can draw on the Subconscious. I believe that information is transmitted to the mind via what is called the VAKOG or Visual, Auditory, Olfactory, Gustatory and touch. In other words we take in the world via these modalities.

In Exodus 3:17, the Old Testament records the ability to change the mind.

When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them on the road through the Philistine country, though that was shorter. For God said, “If they face war, they might change their minds and return to Egypt.”

As seen in Hebrew here

interlinearbible.org/exodus/13-17.htm

and explained here

concordances.org/hebrew/5162.htm

John the Baptist says to repent or change your mind. The word repent is
Metanoeo in Greek…further discussion can be found here

interlinearbible.org/matthew/3-2.htm

and here

concordances.org/greek/3340.htm

So there would be no argument that the New Testament writers knew of the mind.

The OT notes the ability to recall as seen in Lamentations 3:21

Yet this I call to mind and therefore I have hope:

In the interlinear seen here

interlinearbible.org/lamentations/3-21.htm

and explained here

concordances.org/hebrew/7725.htm

In 2 Peter 1:15 Peter says to recall or recollect as you see here…the word is mneme

And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.

The Greek is lasting remembrance

interlinearbible.org/2_peter/1-15.htm

explained as recollect as seen here…

concordances.org/greek/3420.htm

Now I don’t think that there is any question that the mind was known to both Old and New Testament writers. The ability to recall is noted and that recall had to be from some place. I call it the subconscious but whatever you call it your mind stores information that you can bring to the conscious mind and the mind can change. There should be no disagreement here.

Can we agree that as creatures we have eyes, ears, nose, taste and touch to experience the world and gather the information we have in our minds as it relates to the world?

Do you have a problem with any of this so I can move on to the next point?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

Iggy,

Good. This is one point of agreement. God saves and God alone saves however you wish to name it, ie salvation, saved, etc…now so I can explore with you the notion of the paradigm I presented to you concerning salvation as I posted in post #39 and you responded in post #40. Consider the following for me…

I believe in the Conscious mind and the Subconscious mind. The Conscious mind and Subconscious mind are one. We are aware of what we are conscious of and can draw on the Subconscious. I believe that information is transmitted to the mind via what is called the VAKOG or Visual, Auditory, Olfactory, Gustatory and touch. In other words we take in the world via these modalities.

In Exodus 3:17, the Old Testament records the ability to change the mind.

When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them on the road through the Philistine country, though that was shorter. For God said, “If they face war, they might change their minds and return to Egypt.”

As seen in Hebrew here

interlinearbible.org/exodus/13-17.htm

and explained here

concordances.org/hebrew/5162.htm

John the Baptist says to repent or change your mind. The word repent is
Metanoeo in Greek…further discussion can be found here

interlinearbible.org/matthew/3-2.htm

and here

concordances.org/greek/3340.htm

So there would be no argument that the New Testament writers knew of the mind.

The OT notes the ability to recall as seen in Lamentations 3:21

Yet this I call to mind and therefore I have hope:

In the interlinear seen here

interlinearbible.org/lamentations/3-21.htm

and explained here

concordances.org/hebrew/7725.htm

In 2 Peter 1:15 Peter says to recall or recollect as you see here…the word is mneme

And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.

The Greek is lasting remembrance

interlinearbible.org/2_peter/1-15.htm

explained as recollect as seen here…

concordances.org/greek/3420.htm

Now I don’t think that there is any question that the mind was known to both Old and New Testament writers. The ability to recall is noted and that recall had to be from some place. I call it the subconscious but whatever you call it your mind stores information that you can bring to the conscious mind and the mind can change. There should be no disagreement here.

Can we agree that as creatures we have eyes, ears, nose, taste and touch to experience the world and gather the information we have in our minds as it relates to the world?

Do you have a problem with any of this so I can move on to the next point?

No, none that I can object to.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I used that reference because I believe they were regenerated by the washing of the Spirit in Baptism, past tense, and that they had under gone an ontological change in nature leaving an indelible mark or the soul. Thus the use of the Sanctified term prior to Justified, being that it was the Sanctifying grace they received from the Holy Spirit, that brought about there justification.

Aside from the disagreements vis a vie Baptism, I don’t have any problem with that understanding. Regeneration is a significant change in the nature of the individual, and it is a permanent change. What the apostle Peter calls an nonperishable seed. Where we disagree is in seeing the distinction between sanctification and justification.

As do Catholics in a sense. Yes I know that God will continue to keep me, and there is nothing I can do apart from Christ. There are no wages due for work performed as in strict merit! God doesn’t owe me anything. He will always provide the grace I need to turn towards Him in repentance, but will I? The difference we have is that I believe one can resist that grace or accept it.

Yes, that’s what the difference comes down to.

But WILL He, can you KNOW that?

Yes, because His word is truth. Why would I doubt it? Not to say that, since we are human, doubts will never occur. They will for many if not most people, because we still have the unbelieving flesh clinging to us. But we have His promise and the grace of His word to return to when those doubts arise.

It is solely on the Work of Christ in Catholic Theology. There is no Strict Merit in Catholic Theology, whereas we can demand payment due, for work done! Christ has merited our Salvation by grace. We may differ on how that grace is delivered though!

What do you mean by delivered?

Good to hear. I used to attend Evangelical services before Converting (re-verting) to Catholicism. There was a guy that attended that had been an on again, off again, meth addict for over 15 years, and the assistant pastor (a Calivinist) said " Man, he comes back he’s always on fire for the Lord, or so it would seem anyways, but he always goes back to the Meth, that’s where first love is, it just shows me that he’s never been saved" I’m glad to hear that isn’t the typical Calvinist view, because many Calvinist do espouse that. But some of the stuff people in the pews say in the Catholic Church is just way off too. Good thing Catholic theology isn’t defined by some of the folks in the pews!

No one with that attitude should be in ministry, regardless of ecclesiastical tradition.

 

[onemangang]

What do you mean by delivered? .

I was talking about the modus operandi of grace in a sacramental economy!

Maybe administered would be a better word, even that seems a bit lowbrow.

 

[CopticChristian]

No, none that I can object to.

Iggy,

You agree and I can see no reason why saying yes to this stuff would be a problem for anyone. This is simple stuff so the next question as it concerns the paradigm is this. I believe that you are a Christian as you say. This post is about Calvinism. If someone follows the paradigm and is saved and is a Christian then they are always a Christian. This would be consistent with the Calvinistic paradigm and being saved. Now in my experience the next notion is concerning Fellowship and Relationship. My understanding is that as a Christian you always have a Relationship but are not always in Fellowship with Christ, as a Christian, having been saved or actually recognized as being saved ( or one of the elect by your response to the hearing and confessing). Is this correct? A simple yes or no would do.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

Iggy,

You agree and I can see no reason why saying yes to this stuff would be a problem for anyone. This is simple stuff so the next question as it concerns the paradigm is this. I believe that you are a Christian as you say. This post is about Calvinism. If someone follows the paradigm and is saved and is a Christian then they are always a Christian. This would be consistent with the Calvinistic paradigm and being saved. Now in my experience the next notion is concerning Fellowship and Relationship. My understanding is that as a Christian you always have a Relationship but are not always in Fellowship with Christ, as a Christian, having been saved or actually recognized as being saved ( or one of the elect by your response to the hearing and confessing). Is this correct? A simple yes or no would do.

Yes. Not to say more than you requested but I would probably say not always walking in obedience, rather than fellowship.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes. Not to say more than you requested but I would probably say not always walking in obedience, rather than fellowship.

Iggy,

So what I learned as not being in fellowship would be called by you “not walking in obedience”. It appears that my understanding of the paradigm needs some updating. Honestly the word obedience has worthiness and I believe that it is relevant.

Next, consider the Eunuch in Acts 8. There was no New Testament. It is clear that the Eunuch was reading the Old Testament. It is clear that the Eunuch could not understand what he read and had to be taught.

30And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

Also Consider 2 Timothy

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Timothy learned the OT as a child. These verses explain that the OT was Scripture and as of this writing there was no New Testament. Everyone knows that children are read to and in all probability the Scriptures were read to him by his parents. If you look at parallel versions of this passage the word child is often translated as “babe” or “infancy”

bible.cc/2_timothy/3-15.htm

Today as you know there is a program called “Your Baby Can Read”.

yourbabycanread.com/

Honestly there was a time before it became popular on television that I came across this program and bought and sold it because I thought it was so good. I used to talk to the Psychologist that originated the program quite often before it became a National televised product. I should have stuck with that…Oh, well…

There is another program that I came across called “The Gentle Revolution”. The originator is a Physical Therapist that discovered that children can learn at a rapid rate. He is dead and I used to interact with them as well.

gentlerevolution.com/index2.html

The point of all of this is that Timothy was probably read the Scriptures, knew the Scriptures by memory as did most of those in his day and in particular Paul who was a student of Gamaleal as you know.

So at this time the OT was sufficient to know, consciously and subconsciously, and it either had to be read, memorized, someone read it to you and you had to be taught to understand what it meant. Do you have a problem with this statement?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

So at this time the OT was sufficient to know, consciously and subconsciously, and it either had to be read, memorized, someone read it to you and you had to be taught to understand what it meant. Do you have a problem with this statement?

No, none that I can see.

 

[CopticChristian]

No, none that I can see.

Iggy,

You probably are aware that many say that Ronald Regan was “the great communicator”. I am not sure what those that say that mean but the point is that communicating is something that people note and something people admire. I like to think of myself as a communicator.

I marvel at this passage in Romans….it is the bad news that foreshadows the good news as Paul lays it out but it is and has been ever so true. I have seen this used in encyclicals.

19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

I am a student of communication. When I was in college I came across a book written by Alfred Korzybski, Science and Sanity, a treatise on General Semantics. There are other books on the topic such as S.I. Hiyakawa, Language in thought and action. There is an institute of General Semantics found here…

generalsemantics.org/

There are two basic tenets and they are “the map is not the territory” and “time binding”. Before we had the GPS we had Thomas maps and as you may or may not know those maps went out of date as roads were built, streets were named and freeways added. The maps changed based on the territory and the territory was updated by taking information from the past. This is an example of the map of 1920 was not the map of 1960 and by adding and taking information from the past to the future to make a map that is time binding.

We do the same thing with information. What we know about the world in our heads is the map and we update it with information or time bind. So by looking in the world we can see that our created minds function in a particular way and when you look and see things like the following…

1The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; 3And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; 4And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; 5And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; 6And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; 7And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; 8And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; 9And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; 10And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; 11And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

We see that the NT writers knew about creating a map of the territory and time binding. Deuterotomy and Joshua are a continuum of building the map of the territory and time binding and so we can see that the writers of the OT did the same thing.

15The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. 16Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. 17The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: 18For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. 19The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. 20Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. 21Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

Now it is pretty clear that Jesus, the creator, knew about General Semantics and time binding. Recall that Samaria was the capital of the Northern Kingdom. The Samaritan Bible was only the Pentatuch and the Samritans did not worship in the temple in Jerusalem. So when Jesus spoke to this woman he knew what her map was, he knew how to communicate with her according to what he knew her map to be and he effectively communicated with her. He created our minds and knew how they worked better than anyone.

So what I want to say is that General Semantics is nothing more than what was being done in antiquity although it wasn’t called that and that the notion of the “map is not the territory” and “time binding” although described in the 1920’s was done in antiquity. Are you OK with that?

 

[StrawberryJam]

What do Calvinists believe about God’s love? Does he love everyone or only the elect?

I know that I have only met one person in my life who admitted they were of the ones who followed the doctrines according to Calvin. This makes for a very small sample size.

When I asked if their God loved everyone, or just those who knew about the teachings of Calvin I was informed that all would naturally assume his doctrines to be correct if they really believed.

All that I could walk away with was that he was a believer in Calvin.

 

[Roy5]

Mainline Protestants are far less doctrinal than those who initiated the Reformation. Most Presbyterian and Congregationalist (UCC) congregations today, for example, have expanded their views from the days of Calvin, and they permit individual interpretation of scripture - which was, after all, a key demand of early Protestantism. Yes, it caused lots of problems, but it also led to the freedom of religion that we enjoy in America today.

   Of the 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, 55 were Protestant, perhaps about half of those of Calvinist heritage - Congregationalist, Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed, etc. The other major group were the Anglicans. There were a fee of other affiliation - a Quaker and a Baptist, etc. The one Catholic, of course, was Carroll of Maryland.

   There seem to be two basic approaches to modern church life. One, advanced by traditionalists, is that we should hold fast to whatever existed in the original church. The other is that the church needs to change as science and other factors teach us new things. I have read the Church Fathers. They were brilliant for their era, but most of them also wrote much nonsense because they believed such fallacies as the sun goes around the earth, mental illness is caused by demons, and heaven is above the clouds while hell is in the bowels of the earth. How can you build a sound theology on such misinformation? 

  Ignatius, Clement, Augustine and many others should be studied, but the Church should not rely upon them for much guidance in today's world. Remember how St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that 'heretics' should be delivered over to the secular authorities to be executed! Wow! 

  I don't want the Church to be regarded increasingly as an irrelevant relic of ancient and medieval times. It needs to change!

 

[anodos]

I’m not qualified to debate the subject, but I’ve been enjoying the conversation. Some of the posts on this thread seem to suggest that one can’t be Catholic AND believe in predestination. This isn’t the case, so long as the theory does not contradict revealed truth; for example, it would be heretical to claim that God directly predestined anyone to sin and hell, but its acceptable to say that some were directly predestined to heaven and others were not. (This isn’t THE Catholic position, just one of a few acceptable theories.) Apologies if someone has already mentioned this and I’m just being redundant.

newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

 

[jlhargus]

Does God save man, or does man save himself?

JL: [Dt30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that ** I HAVE SET BEFORE YOU LIFE AND DEATH, blessing and cursing: therefore CHOOSE life, that both thou and thy seed may live:] God does not FORCE us to accept Him with irrestable grace. He gives us grace which enables us to FREELY CHOOSE life or death. God ALONE SAVES. Yet He does so thru His Word with the Holy Spirit working thru His SENT people and sacraments.

Rms10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and HOW SHALL THEY HEAR WITHOUT A PREACHER? 15 And HOW SHALL THEY PREACH, EXCEPT THE BE SENT? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

[1Pt3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, **eight souls were SAVED BY WATER. 21 THE LIKE FIGURE whereunto even BAPTISM doth also NOW SAVE US (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:]

If man saves himself, that is, makes the choice to save himself, then yes, your position would make sense. However, Scripture does not present such a scenario,

JL: I would say scripture does present such a scenario. Man does have a choice as Dt30 tells us. Unless God has CHANGED His mind. What I would like to see is scripture evidence for your scenario of irresistible grace.

[Acts2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, **SAYING, SAVE YOURSELVE from this untoward generation. 41 Then THEY THAT GLADLY RECEIVED HIS WORD WERE BAPTIZED: AND the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.] With God’s mercy and grace they were TRULY FREE to CHOSE life or death. They were truly free, not forced, to chose life by an irresistible grace nor forced by a fallen nature to chose death. Thru God’s mercy and grace three thousand freely CHOOSE life saving themselves being baptized. Thereby being REGENERATED receiving REMISSION OF SINS and the indwelling HOLY SPIRIT.

[Titus:3:5 **Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but ACCORDING TO HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, BY THE WASHING OF REGENERATION, AND RENEWING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT;] How does scripture tell us we are WASHED, sanctified and cleansed?]

[Act22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and **BE BAPTIZED, and WASH AWAY THEY SINS, calling on the name of the Lord.]

[Eph5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 **That he might SANCTIFY and CLEANSE it WITH THE WASHING OF WATER BY THE WORD,]

Notice Titus 3:5, BY WASHING (water) of REGENERATION and RENEWING of the HOLY SPIRIT. Mirrors [Jn3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, EXCEPT a man be BORN OF **WATER and of the SPIRIT, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.]

[Mt7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; BUT HE THAT **DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER which is in heaven.]

We must CHOSE to do the will of God. God gives the grace that we might be truly free to CHOSE doing His will or rejecting His will. Every single time one undergoes a serious temptation they CHOSE. Either life or death doing God’s will or not doing God’s will chosing to sin.

[1TIM4:15 Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. 16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this THOU SHALT BOTH **SAVE THYSELF, AND THEM THAT HEAR THEE.] To save thyself strongly implies a CHOICE can be made by the individual.

but rather, presents a God who saves a people unto Himself. If it is God who saves, then His love for His people must differ, or His love would save everyone.

JL: In other words you believe God IS a respecter of persons and discriminates being partial to some and indifferent to the plight of others.

[Jms2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; 3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?]

Your theory couldn’t be called any sort of love or justice. To throw into eternal torment those who can’t possibly help themselves nor be saved without their creator’s grace. And God willfully and deliberately withholds that grace. God wills all men to be saved but He will not save anyone AGAINST their free will choice.

Titus2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

[1Tm4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, **WHO IS THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN, specially of those that believe.

1Jn2:2 He paid for our sins with His own blood. He did not pay for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world.

 

[jlhargus]

If, however, grace merely gives man the ability to choose or reject God’s love, then grace is not sufficient, because it would still require something in man to complete salvation.

JL: If grace is irresistible then one is not TRULY FREE. They have no option. Grace is sufficient because grace supplies the knowledge, strength and option to chose the right.

[1Cor10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. ] Grace is not irrestible otherwise why would one need a way to escape. We chose the escapte God’s grace supplies or we chose to sin.

You’re right in saying that grace doesn’t constrain man’s free will. What it does is liberate his will from its bondage to sin.

JL: Irresistible grace would constrain man’s free will. Accoding to you the Creator willfully and deliberately creates souls for eternal torment. Willfully not liberating them giving them no option, no change whatsoever. Withholding from them the very grace they need to FREELY CHOOSE to love and serve Him or sin.

Can they be blamed for doing whatever gives them pleasure. Can they be blamed for lying, stealing and murdering in order to better their earthly life? They wouldn’t be responsible for their actions as they are created evil and their creator won’t lift a finger to help them. Civil authority would be unjust for putting them in prison. They are no different or responsible than an insane person who cannot help himself.

[2Cor5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.] What would be the purpose of Paul BESEECHING in Christ’s stead telling people to be RECONCILED to God if they couldn’t chose to be reconciled by an irresistible grace?

In that liberation, however, man will always freely choose to love and serve his Creator, because that is what the new birth does to our hearts. Renews and restores it to what our heart was meant to do.

JL: Did Adam, who was in a more perfect state of grace than we, CHOSE life or death by eating? Adam was not troubled by concupiscene as are we. We have to carry our cross daily. In that daily spiritual battle with which we must struggle against the desires of the flesh and the will of God. Yes the new birth by water AND of the Spirit does regenerate a spiritually dead soul. Enabling the soul (spirit) to now overcome the carnal flesh. With the indwelling Holy Spirit we are FREE INDEED. Truly free to CHOSE life or death. If one can’t CHOSE then they are not TRULY FREE. Irresistible grace is not freedom anymore than bondage to sin.

[Jn8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 33-35 … 36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.] There are several scriptures, such as the following, which clearly show grace is not irresistible and Christians are FREE INDEED to choose LIFE or DEATH.

[Hb6:4 For it is impossible for those who were ONCE ENLIGHTENED, and have TASTED of THE HEAVENLY GIFT, and were made PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, 5 And have TASTED the good WORD OF GOD, AND THE POWERS OF THE WORLD TO COME, 6 IF THEY SHALL FALL AWAY, TO RENEW THEM AGAIN unto repentance; SEEING THEY CRUCIFY to themselves THE SON of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.]

Paul is addressing a Christian community, those who have been ENLIGHTENED. They are not on the brink of being enlightened they are ENLIGHTENED and HAVE TASTED OF THE HEAVENLY GIFT, MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, They have the indwelling Holy Ghost.

Paul warns BELIEVERS, with the indwelling Holy Spirit, of the danger of apostasy, alluding to those once Christian Jews, who left the Christian community and returned to Judaism. Having rejected Christ’s sacrifice, returning and placing their faith in animal sacrifice, which can never renew them again to repentance, taking away sin. [Hb10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.]

It is impossible for them to repent and be renewed, apart from Christ and the Christian Community. As long as they remain hostile to the Gospel, it is impossible to renew them unto repentance. [Mk3:28 Verily I say unto you, ALL SINS SHALL BE FORGIVEN UNTO THE SONS OF MEN, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29 BUT he that shall BLASPHEME AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST HATH NEVER FORGIVENESS, but is in danger of eternal damnation.] They are separated from Christ and his people, by choice and crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, as long as they remain obstinate.

God doesn’t force us to not love and worship our Creator. Apart from His grace, however, we would never desire to love and worship our Creator! Everything within us desires only rebellion, prior to regeneration (Ephesians 2).

JL: I disagree, apart from grace, in earliest times societies, primitive and advanced, have sought to serve and worship a god or creator. They knew there was a God they just didn’t KNOW him. Scripture tells us we can know there is a God looking at creation. We can’t KNOW God unless He reveals himself to us as He has done.

Yes. However, we would argue that that grace is not given to all. But is given to those whom God set aside and gave to Christ as His inheritance. Grace is particular (John 6).

JL: Could you demonstrate that using John 6?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

So what I want to say is that General Semantics is nothing more than what was being done in antiquity although it wasn’t called that and that the notion of the “map is not the territory” and “time binding” although described in the 1920’s was done in antiquity. Are you OK with that?

Yes.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I’m not qualified to debate the subject, but I’ve been enjoying the conversation. Some of the posts on this thread seem to suggest that one can’t be Catholic AND believe in predestination. This isn’t the case, so long as the theory does not contradict revealed truth; for example, it would be heretical to claim that God directly predestined anyone to sin and hell, but its acceptable to say that some were directly predestined to heaven and others were not. (This isn’t THE Catholic position, just one of a few acceptable theories.) Apologies if someone has already mentioned this and I’m just being redundant.

newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

No, I don’t think anyone has brought that up, anodos, and it’s an important point. Though within our modern context the figure of John Calvin is associated with the doctrine of predestination, Calvin did nothing many of his Roman Catholic predecessors didn’t do. Augustine of Hippo wrote more about predestination that Calvin ever did, and many would argue Calvin said nothing significantly different than Augustine on the subject (I wouldn’t exactly agree with that, however, they are not substantially different). His Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints is eye opening, to say the least.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes.

Iggy,

Just a few more thoughts before I explain my inability to accept the paradigm. NLP was the offshoot of General Semantics. I was a psychology major for a time and to be honest at one time I was interested because I wanted to know how the mind worked. This got me nowhere. NLP actually was discovered by Richard Bandler modeling the language of Virginia Satir a Family Therapist. He discovered that by using the same words and intonations and patterns she spoke he could get the same results as she did and out of this came NLP or excellence in modeling. A great deal of work was done to investigate this and you will find a series of books written “Strategies of Genius” written by Robert Dills about how these people’s minds worked to try to get insight. Out of NLP came what are called suppositions. Rather than trying to understand the intricacies of the mind they looked at results of what the mind does…one of the many things they discovered was something called “reframing”. A summary of NLP can be found here. You can search for yourself “suppositions of NLP” to see what I am talking about.

nlp-mentor.com/whatisnlp/nlp-modeling

Reframing is to change the way a story is told or a situation is seen. It is a communication presupposition. He who reframes the conversation controls the conversation.

Jesus was a master at reframing. All of His “But I say unto you…” statements were reframes in the light of the newness of the Gospel. Consider the following examples:

1. (Matthew 5:21-22 KJV)  Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:  But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

1. (Matthew 5:27-28, KJV)  Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.   But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

1. (Matthew 5:43-44 KJV)  Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.  But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Much of Jesus’ teaching revolved around the reframes that His coming revealed. The Woman at the Well in John 4 is an example. To the woman the well water was just that. To Jesus the well water was a metaphor or reframe for her need to know Him. This water was temporal. His water, i.e. His life was eternal. In the ninth chapter of John, Jesus and His disciples saw a man who was blind from birth. The disciples inquired of Jesus, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents…?” In the context of their tradition (and their map of the world), someone must have sinned for this man to be so unfortunate. Our Lord answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was in order that the works of God might be displayed in him” (John 9:3). Jesus then proceeded to heal the man.[4] In the context of God and our Lord’s ministry, the man’s blindness gave Jesus opportunity to heal the man and proclaim His Messiahship. In the context of the Disciples’ thinking, somebody sinned.

So as you might expect, Jesus, the master of communication was using NLP long before NLP came on the scene. As NLP discovered that you could model excellence to get results, Jesus was saying follow me. So, Jesus, the creators of our mind, knew and used what these guys later discovered and called NLP. As you might expect Paul was good at what his master taught him as well…as we look in the world we can see what God is doing. Are you OK with this?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

Iggy,
Are you OK with this?

Well, I am not certainly not versed enough in the psychological sphere to offer any cogent objection to what you said as it relates to that. However, I can’t find any particular fault in your logic and the way in which Jesus was able to handle conversations with those He encountered. So, yes, I would say so.

 

[jlhargus]

Sure, Coptic. You must hear Scripture, per your Romans 10 reference. Scripture is preached and carries with it the power of the Holy Spirit, who calls His people through that word and changes their hearts through it.

JL: In Acts two, Pentecost, gives the definitive example of how one is set on the road of salvation. Romans 10 is general it doesn’t even mention repenting.

[Acts2:37 Now when **THEY HEARD this, they were PRICKED IN THEIR HEART, and SAID unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, WHAT SHALL WE DO? 38 Then PETER SAID unto them, REPENT, and BE BAPTIZED EVERY ONE OF YOU in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the REMISSION OF SINS, and ye shall RECEIVE the gift of THE HOLY GHOST. 39 For THE PROMISE is unto you, AND to YOUR CHILDREN, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.]

First they HEARD the Word, it pierced their HEART, they BELIEVED. Then told to REPENT, be BAPTIZED FOR remission of sins, RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit.

[Acts2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, **SAVE YOURSELVES **from the untoward generation. 41 Then THEY that gladly RECEIVED his word were BAPTIZED: and the SAME DAY were **ADDED UNTO THEM **about three thousand souls. 42 And THEY CONTINUED stedfastly IN THE APOSTLES’ doctrine and FELLOWSHIP, and in breaking of bread (mass), and in prayers.] Peter says SAVE YOURSELVES. How did they save themselves? By believing, repenting, being BAPTIZED for REMMISSION OF SIN and RECEIVING the gift to the HOLY SPIRIT. Thru which they WERE ADDED to that ONE VISIBLE apostolic fellowship the Church, the body of Christ.]

[1Pt3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, **eight souls were SAVED BY WATER. 21 THE LIKE FIGURE whereunto even BAPTISM doth also NOW SAVE US (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:]

[Titus:3:5 **Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but ACCORDING TO HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, BY THE WASHING OF REGENERATION, AND RENEWING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT;]

How does scripture tell us we are WASHED?

[Act22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and **BE BAPTIZED, and WASH AWAY THEY SINS, calling on the name of the Lord.]

How do we become children of God?

[Gal 3:26 For **YE ARE all the CHILDREN OF GOD by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For AS MANY of you AS HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED into Christ HAVE PUT ON CHRIST.]

Jn3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, EXCEPT a man be BORN OF water AND OF the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Get water and the Word.

Eph5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might SANCTIFY AND CLEANSE IT WITH the WASHING OF WATER BY THE WORD,

That is to say, the word is the means by which the Spirit works in the heart and grants the new birth to whomsoever He will. Once the heart is regenerated, it then becomes the response of the individual to confess and believe. So it would be (1) Preach the word (2) Regeneration (3) Confession of Christ. I’m not saved yet, though, cause Jesus hasn’t returned!

JL: Christ tells Nicodemus one is BORN AGAIN by water AND of the Spirit, Jn3:5. Paul tells us one is REGENERATED by the WASHING of regeneration and renewing of the HOLY SPIRIT, Titus3:5.

[Acts2:37 Now when **THEY HEARD this, they were PRICKED IN THEIR HEART, and SAID unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, WHAT SHALL WE DO? 38 Then PETER SAID unto them, REPENT, and BE BAPTIZED EVERY ONE OF YOU in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the REMISSION OF SINS, and ye shall RECEIVE the gift of THE HOLY GHOST. 39 For THE PROMISE is unto you, AND to YOUR CHILDREN, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.]

First they HEARD the Word, it periced their HEART, they BELIEVED. Told to REPENT, be BAPTIZED FOR remission of sins, RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit.

[Acts2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, **SAVE YOURSELVES **from the untoward generation. 41 Then THEY that gladly RECEIVED his word were BAPTIZED: and the SAME DAY were **ADDED UNTO THEM **about three thousand souls. 42 And THEY CONTINUED stedfastly IN THE APOSTLES’ doctrine and FELLOWSHIP, and in breaking of bread (mass), and in prayers.] Peter says SAVE YOURSELVES. How? By being BAPTIZED thru which they WERE ADDED to that ONE VISIBLE apostolic fellowship the Church, the body of Christ.]

Acts2 hear the word, the heart is pierced they believe. They ask WHAT MUST WE DO? Peter said REPENT and BE BAPTIZED everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR REMISSION OF SINS, and you shall RECEIVE the gift of the HOLY SPIRIT. For the PROMISE is for you AND your CHILDREN. With many other word Peter testified saying SAVE YOURSELVES. Those that received his word were BAPTIZED and ADDED to the body of Christ. They continued in the APOSTLES DOCTRINE, FELLOWSHIP, BREADING OF BREAD=mass and PRAYERS.