Question for Calvinists if any are reading

[ibkc]

This is about predestination. On another board that I read, a self-professed Calvinist has declared that she knows with certainty that she is one of the elect.

Is that possible? How can you know such a thing, if it is indeed true?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

It boils down to if one knows that they have an relationship with Jesus.

1 John 5
Faith in the Son of God
**
1Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well. 2This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands.** 3This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, 4for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. 5Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.
6This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. 9We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. 10Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. **12He who has the Son has life; **he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

Concluding Remarks

13I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. 14This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. 15And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.
16If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

18We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him. 19We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. 20We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—**even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. **

21Dear children, keep yourselves from idols.

Footnotes

 

[Alexius]

I’m not sure. What I have heard is that the elect will not fall away from the faith. If a “saved” person goes out and kills someone, then it is said that they weren’t really “saved” to begin with (i.e. part of the elect). One can know they are part of the elect by the proof of their works. If they lack good works, then they do not have saving faith and are not part of the elect.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[MarcoPolo]

This is about predestination. On another board that I read, a self-professed Calvinist has declared that she knows with certainty that she is one of the elect.

Is that possible? How can you know such a thing, if it is indeed true?

I believe that is the sin of presumption. Sure we can have an understanding that we are living in a state of grace, but ultimate judgement is for God alone. We must work out our salvation with “fear and trembling”. She sounds like she might be vulnerable to a fall.

 

[grandfather]

This is about predestination. On another board that I read, a self-professed Calvinist has declared that she knows with certainty that she is one of the elect.

Is that possible? How can you know such a thing, if it is indeed true?

You can’t. It is a false dcotrine.

 

[Zero_the_Hero]

You can’t. It is a false dcotrine.

How come John says you can know if you have eternal life?

1Jn 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

It seems to me that one can have knowledge that one has eternal life by reading what John has to say.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

Back when I was Reformed, and we went by the Westminster Confession of Faith, it said that assurance of salvation was not essential to being saved. In fact, it said that was a rare gift that few people received (assurance).

I’d have to go back and look and see how that related to I John 5. But essentially, a Calvinist will believe that IF they are one of the elect, then they know that they will for sure be saved, including they know they will persevere to the end IF they are elect. But that assurance that they are elect is not the essence of salvation.

I think about this and relate it to my Catholic faith. I don’t know if I am one of the elect, and I don’t know that I will persevere to the end. But I do know where I stand Sacramentally speaking. Also, I am able to say “right now I am in a state of grace” or “right now I’m not in a state of grace.”

I do know certain things, and I do know I have eternal life. Which is more than I could say for sure back when I believed like a Calvinist.

 

[Zero_the_Hero]

Back when I was Reformed, and we went by the Westminster Confession of Faith, it said that assurance of salvation was not essential to being saved. In fact, it said that was a rare gift that few people received (assurance).

The Chapter Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation does not affirm that assurance was a rare gift that few people received. It says that the believer may, without extraordinary revelation, in the right use of ordinary means, attain thereunto.

I’d have to go back and look and see how that related to I John 5. But essentially, a Calvinist will believe that IF they are one of the elect, then they know that they will for sure be saved, including they know they will persevere to the end IF they are elect. But that assurance that they are elect is not the essence of salvation.

Assurance of salvation is not essential to being saved along with knowing you are saved for sure if you are elect are incompatable with each other because essential and necessary are basicly the same thing. You are affirming by saying that if they are one of the elect, then they know that they will for sure be saved that knowledge of surity is necessiary to being elect because if you are elect then you must have this knowledge.

I think about this and relate it to my Catholic faith. I don’t know if I am one of the elect, and I don’t know that I will persevere to the end. But I do know where I stand Sacramentally speaking. Also, I am able to say “right now I am in a state of grace” or “right now I’m not in a state of grace.”

I do know certain things, and I do know I have eternal life. Which is more than I could say for sure back when I believed like a Calvinist.

You know you have eternal life because you participate in the sacraments, since you say that you know where you stand Sacramentally speaking. So do you believe that if you partake of the sacraments faithfuly, that God will declare you rightous on the basis of your partaking of the sacraments?

 

[grandfather]

You know you have eternal life because you participate in the sacraments, since you say that you know where you stand Sacramentally speaking. So do you believe that if you partake of the sacraments faithfuly, that God will declare you rightous on the basis of your partaking of the sacraments?

The sacraments are not a guarantee of salvation. They are the ordinary means of grace. They must be approached properly. Some time ago a Presbyterian friend converted to Catholicism after a couple of years of study and a private vision of Mary. I remember as she prepared for her first confession. It is difficult to know what to expect and kind of intimidating to reveal the deepest secrets of your soul, the things you are ashamed of doing and carry around never having told anyone. After she went I asked her what her experience was like. She reported what many Catholics try to explain, but never can completely. The word she used was euphoria. It feels like having weight lifted off your soul. You feel free. In a sense this is a knowing.

We believe we must overcome sin to be saved. We must repent. Jesus tells His apostles to go to all the world and preach the gospel of repentance for forgiveness of sins and tells them He gives them the power to fogives sins or hold them bound. He says He will reward those who overcome.

The soul knows in conscience when it has overcome. It knows when it is attached to sin and knows when it is free. When Christians are in sin we try to justify ourselves and tell ourselves that God will accept us anyway. He does love us when we are in sin, but we don’t love Him.

When we are in sin we know it. When we are in the state of grace we know it. Some people have never been in the state of grace. They do not know what it is like. They might go to church every Sunday and read their Bibles faithfully and pray. But they remain enslaved to some sin. They know it, but they can not know what it is like to be free, to have grace. They may believe in Jesus atoning death on the cross and call Him “lord, lord”. If or when they look in their consciences they know the truth about their sinfulness, but they still say they are saved. This is tragic. They lack grace, but tell themselves they have it, because they so desperately want to believe they are saved. They have not overcome.

As the ordinary means of grace the sacraments help us overcome sin. Why wouldn’t anyone want this? They lack faith. They refuse to believe. This is something that if one has not experienced it is impossible to know or understand. My friend who went to her first sacramental confession could not possibly have known what this spiritual experience would be like before having it and now says she can not live without it.

So when a Catholic makes a statment that he knows sacramentally the condition of his soul and a Protestant pooh-poohs it, it is because lacking the experience it is something he can not comprehend so he rejects it.

Two people who have known the same experience can share with one another what it was like, because they have common knowledge. I have had several kidney stones. Others who have had them know what this pain is like. Those who have not can not know. Experiencing sacramental grace, the joy or euphoria many people know in sacramental confessoin for example, is like this in a sense. There is almost no point in talking about it to a skeptic. It is something that can not be explained.

It is also something one can not experience just to try it, or see what it is like, because others say they benefit from it. It has to be approached in faith, not for curiosity.

Only God and you know the secret of your soul. Either you are in the state of sin or the state of grace. You know. The Jews ready to stone the adultress were convicted in their consciences of their sins. Jesus told the pharisees that they would die in their sins, meaning they would go to hell. The opposite would be repentance, being truly freed by Him, knowing what this grace and mercy is like. He told them that they searched the scriptures thinking that in them they would find eternal life, but He knew the love of God was not in them. How do you know if the love of God is in you? Read the rest of what John said in his letter.

 

[Zooey]

grandfather:

Only God and you know the secret of your soul. Either you are in the state of sin or the state of grace. You know. The Jews ready to stone the adultress were convicted in their consciences of their sins. Jesus told the pharisees that they would die in their sins, meaning they would go to hell. The opposite would be repentance, being truly freed by Him, knowing what this grace and mercy is like. He told them that they searched the scriptures thinking that in them they would find eternal life, but He knew the love of God was not in them. How do you know if the love of God is in you? Read the rest of what John said in his letter.

:clapping: [and, if I may, another :clapping: from my forerunner in faith, Fr. John Wesley].
The problem I have with Calvinism, is that I do believe that it puts people in danger of presuming on God’s grace…I know that Calvinists will say that it shouldn’t do that, but in practice, there are always people (like, perhaps, the lady mentioned by OP) who are dangerously close to declaring that they are somehow incapable of ever tossing out the state of grace, to return to a life of sinful indulgence…:twocents:
(And I do know that there are lovely Christian people amongst the Calvinist camp, who are “working out their salvation with fear and trembling” as we are all called to do).

 

[angelusm]

This is about predestination. On another board that I read, a self-professed Calvinist has declared that she knows with certainty that she is one of the elect.

Is that possible? How can you know such a thing, if it is indeed true?

Getting rich is important for calvinists. They believe that if God “blesses” you with richness, you are the one of the elect. Maybe she is rich…
Predestination means that people since they are born, are destined to be either saved or damned. It is obviously ridiculous because it means that we can’t do anything to be saved if God decided to condemn us. Our free will doesn’t matter. Does the God of calvinists really love his children?
We can’t know if we are saved or not until the final judgement. I know one exception - Polish saint Maximilian Kolbe somehow knew he was going to be saved.

 

[grandfather]

:
The problem I have with Calvinism, is that I do believe that it puts people in danger of presuming on God’s grace.

Is it possible to be saved while we are in sin? Some Protestants say yes. I know some who say that once a person has accepted Jesus they are saved no matter what. Some say no, that the person who seemed to be living a life of grace and who abandoned it to get involved in serious sin, never had saving faith, had election. This post addresses the latter.

If we can not be saved withour repentance, turning from sin, then we can know today by examining our consciences the state of our soul. We can see if we are either in the state of sin or grace. If we do this and see our past sins and know we are no longer engaged in them then we know the condition of our soul at that moment.

Jesus told Peter that He prayed for him for protection against Satan who wanted to destroy him and that that Peter’s faith would not fail. Peter swore he would never abandon Jesus and was told by Jesus that he would.

We see in Peter someone who presumed he would persevere in faith and never abandon Christ. This is the same person Jesus told to forgive his brother seventy times seven.

The spiritual life is a struggle. We struggle against our fallen natures to obey God. Sometimes we fail. When we fail how do we explain it in the Calvinist view? They say this person never had saving faith. The Catholic would say the person might have been in the state of grace and lost it. Which is it?

Why does Jesus say to Peter, to whom He gave the power to loose or hold bound sins that Peter should forgive 70X7? Jesus knew that most of us would need to be reconciled with God more than once. When we sin we abandon God and His grace and choose evil. Peter abandoned Jesus and repented.

Practically, what does a Calvinist do when someone in his church falls into some serious sin, has an affair with someone else’s wife? Does he tell the sinner that he was never saved and is going to hell and this sin proves he is damned? Does he tell him to repent and get back on track?

Practically, what does a Calvinist do when he sees sin in his own life, lust, avarice, malice, deceit, etc.? Does he tell himself his assurance is intact? This would be tragic. It would be believing a deadly lie, that he is steeped in sin and saved.

He can tell himself that he was never saved. This is possible if he never before repented. But if he did repent of sin and went back to it what does he tell himself? He has two options. He was never saved and is destined to be damned. He was never saved and can still be saved. But if before he went back to his sin and told himself he was assured of heaven the assurance had to be an illusion.

For those who have never repented it is impossible to know what grace is like. They may tell themselves they have it, because they believe in Jesus. For those who have known grace, most also know they fall. Most of us are like this. We are in the 70X7crowd. We need forgiveness again and again. Thankfully, God’s mercy does not wear out.

Protestants say this view is false, because God does not give us salvation and take it back over and over again. This is true. We are the ones who abandon Him 70X7.

If we do fall into serious sin we have no way of knowing whether we will turn again from it. My conscience can tell me where I am today, but not about tomorrow. Peter swore he would not abandon the Lord, great intentions, but he did not know that before the night was over what would happen. Somehow a Calvinist knows more about his entire future life than Peter did about his next few hours.

Once we have sanctifying grace it is so wonderful, freeing, joyous, do we have the power to abandon it? It would be insane. Adam and Eve did. Peter did. I do. It is insane to sin in the first place. When we do we obey Satan who hates us and wants to destroy us, and disobey God who loves us and wants our eternal good. This is either insane, or we are blind. Jesus asks forgiveness for those who crucify Him on the grounds that they do not know what they are doing. They are blind. He says to the pharisees that they say they see, and they claim to have no sin so they do not need Him.

I need Him to forgive my past. I need His protection now and in the future. If I abandon Him I will need more forgiveness. I know I am weak. I know myself. I pray that today God will protect me from evil. If I presumed I would never sin again and had this assurance I would not last five minutes.

God be merciful to us all, especially those who believe they have salvation assured and are deceived, especially those who are in sin and think they are assured of heaven, whoever they are.

 

[Zero_the_Hero]

If we can not be saved withour repentance, turning from sin, then we can know today by examining our consciences the state of our soul. We can see if we are either in the state of sin or grace. If we do this and see our past sins and know we are no longer engaged in them then we know the condition of our soul at that moment.

I think we must ask ourselves do we really believe Jesus obeyed the law perfectly in my place and died for my sins, because this is the hinge on which religion turns. From this undertanding we can have infallible assurance of faith because it is based on the Word of God which cannot lie.

The spiritual life is a struggle. We struggle against our fallen natures to obey God. Sometimes we fail. When we fail how do we explain it in the Calvinist view? They say this person never had saving faith. The Catholic would say the person might have been in the state of grace and lost it. Which is it?

If a person sins, then that does not mean the person never had saving faith, since if we say we have no sin we are liars.

Why does Jesus say to Peter, to whom He gave the power to loose or hold bound sins that Peter should forgive 70X7? Jesus knew that most of us would need to be reconciled with God more than once. When we sin we abandon God and His grace and choose evil. Peter abandoned Jesus and repented.

I disagree because Peter cannot reconcile us to God since he is but a man. Only God can forgive sins and reconcile us to himself. Peter can administer church discipline which looses and bounds people from the Word and Lord’s Supper.

Practically, what does a Calvinist do when someone in his church falls into some serious sin, has an affair with someone else’s wife? Does he tell the sinner that he was never saved and is going to hell and this sin proves he is damned? Does he tell him to repent and get back on track?

The reason someone is damned is because of Adam’s sin, and since all people fell in Adam, then all are damned and destined to hell. Yes, we are to encourage repentance which means turning from sin to Jesus who has come save some from the all in Adam.

Practically, what does a Calvinist do when he sees sin in his own life, lust, avarice, malice, deceit, etc.? Does he tell himself his assurance is intact? This would be tragic. It would be believing a deadly lie, that he is steeped in sin and saved.

If we see sin in our life, we are to repent of particular sins particularly and not be concerned with a general repentance. Sometimes we need to remove our eyes from our face or sever our hands off because it is better to remove our parts then to be cast into the fire.

He can tell himself that he was never saved. This is possible if he never before repented. But if he did repent of sin and went back to it what does he tell himself? He has two options. He was never saved and is destined to be damned. He was never saved and can still be saved. But if before he went back to his sin and told himself he was assured of heaven the assurance had to be an illusion.

The verdict of justification cannot be revoked because of the sin of a believer, because he was not justified on the basis of his own rightousness but on Christ’s. If a believer sins, his option before him is to confess his sin God if it is a private sin and seek forgivness, but it is public, then it is declared publicy to the party offended.

 

[Zooey]

I think we must ask ourselves do we really believe Jesus obeyed the law perfectly in my place and died for my sins, because this is the hinge on which religion turns. From this undertanding we can have infallible assurance of faith because it is based on the Word of God which cannot lie.

I *think *we differ on the matter of exactly what an “infallible assurance” means.
I’m not going to swear to it, but that’s what I’m hearing.
I trust Jesus Christ, implicitly.
I trust myself as far as I can throw my great-grandmother’s upright grand piano……No, I trust myself less than that. A good deal less…

If a person sins, then that does not mean the person never had saving faith, since if we say we have no sin we are liars.

True. But-- this creates the very paradox of which we are speaking.

The reason someone is damned is because of Adam’s sin, and since all people fell in Adam, then all are damned and destined to hell. Yes, we are to encourage repentance which means turning from sin to Jesus who has come save some from the all in Adam.

Original sin. Yes. We are all deeply damaged by Adam. The question is not, are we or are we not damaged; the question is: What happens after we repent? And fall again…and again…and again??
Because:crying: we do. We:banghead: will. That is the human condition, after all, living in a fallen world…

If we see sin in our life, we are to repent of particular sins particularly and not be concerned with a general repentance.

I’m not convinced that this is true. There is a good deal of wisdom in repenting of all sin, on a regular basis. If only because we have bad memories, but more, because we may well have been working out some mental reassurance that a “favorite” sin is somehow less sinful. Or, even, God help us!! a positive good. (That’s original sin again).

The verdict of justification cannot be revoked because of the sin of a believer, because he was not justified on the basis of his own rightousness but on Christ’s.

But then we are faced with the specter of:bigyikes: antinomianism.

If a believer sins, his option before him is to confess his sin God if it is a private sin and seek forgivness, but it is public, then it is declared publicy to the party offended.

Now, that’s interesting…I like the distinction between sins. Its important to make, so that we don’t beat ourselves up forever,say, over a nickel we secretly pinched at the age of 8.
But I am:ehh: troubled by the fact that the only difference you regard is private vs public sin. Private murder is surely of rather more import than the aforementioned privately purloined nickel–Is it not???

 

[Reformed_Rob]

…
Predestination means that people since they are born, are destined to be either saved or damned. It is obviously ridiculous because it means that we can’t do anything to be saved if God decided to condemn us. Our free will doesn’t matter. Does the God of calvinists really love his children? …

Actually, that is known as “Double Predestination.” There is a huge difference. You can be Catholic and believe in predestination. But you should not believe in double predestination if you are Catholic.

Many Calvinists will disagree on the topic of “who God loves.” The way I was taught is that God loves the righteous. That would be defined more specifically as “God loves Christ, and God imputes Christ’s righteousness to the regenerate.” The Calvinist view continues, that God hates all workers of iniquity. Which would, of course, be everybody. Except (the caveat) those who are regenerate.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I’m not sure. What I have heard is that the elect will not fall away from the faith. If a “saved” person goes out and kills someone, then it is said that they weren’t really “saved” to begin with (i.e. part of the elect). One can know they are part of the elect by the proof of their works. If they lack good works, then they do not have saving faith and are not part of the elect.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

First, there is the Calvinist escape clause,

1 John 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Then the proof text, that the elect can not be decieved,

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.

Mark 13:22
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect—if that were possible.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

google.com/search?hl=en&q=Bible+assurance+of+salvation

Question, Do Catholics lack an assuarance of Salvation?

 

[Reformed_Rob]

The Chapter Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation does not affirm that assurance was a rare gift that few people received. It says that the believer may, without extraordinary revelation, in the right use of ordinary means, attain thereunto.

Hi Hero Zero,

I certainly did not mean to misquote the wmcof. I was working off of what is a somewhat rusty “near memorization” of it, since it was drilled into me for many months of sermons and constant reference for 2-3 years.

I don’t have it here readily available, but I am 99.9% sure there is a sentence that reads basically what I was saying.

You may find it before I do, it will probably be a few days until I get it.

Is the concept of God imputing righteousness to a person for a good work they did strange to you? I’ll admit, it was to me! But here is an event mentioned in two different passages of Scripture that teaches exactly that…

Numbers 25:1-13 and Psalm 106:28-31
We are told that Phinehas, by his zeal for God shown through his actions, both made atonement for the sons of Israel, and God reckoned Phinehas’ action to him as righteousness.

 

[grandfather]

google.com/search?hl=en&q=Bible+assurance+of+salvation

Question, Do Catholics lack an assuarance of Salvation?

Yes, and so do Protestants.

We have a lively hope. We can know where we stand with God today. We can not know that we will not abandon him tomorrow. Again, my Calvinist friends will say that they have assuarance and they know so-and-so does also. Then so-and-so runs off with his secretary. The response they give me is that so-and-so never had salvation, because it can’t be lost. How do they know then, that anyone has salvation, or themselves? I had a Protestant pastor friend tell his congregation that he knew with absolute certainty that I have salvation. I don’t know how he knew this. He is a dear friend. I think he hopes I do.

 

[Zero_the_Hero]

I *think *we differ on the matter of exactly what an “infallible assurance” means.
I’m not going to swear to it, but that’s what I’m hearing.
I trust Jesus Christ, implicitly.

The assurance is infallible since we trust what Scripture says about Jesus. Scripture explicitly gives us the knowledge that we need to know who he is and what he has done. We believe the promises that God has revealed in Scripture which gives us assurance.

Original sin. Yes. We are all deeply damaged by Adam. The question is not, are we or are we not damaged; the question is: What happens after we repent? And fall again…and again…and again??

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We should acknowledge our sin before God, and desire that we should be changed by asking God for grace. We also must know that God only accepts us because of what Christ has done, and not for anything that we do.

I’m not convinced that this is true. There is a good deal of wisdom in repenting of all sin, on a regular basis. If only because we have bad memories, but more, because we may well have been working out some mental reassurance that a “favorite” sin is somehow less sinful. Or, even, God help us!! a positive good. (That’s original sin again).

The conscience that we have can falter and err, so that it needs to be checked with the law of God revealed to guide us. What we know without special revelation is enough to condemn us, but what we know without the Bible is insufficent as a guide on how to live in the covenant of grace.

But then we are faced with the specter of:bigyikes: antinomianism.

We then by no means overthrow the law by this faith, for on the contrary, we uphold the law. Since Jesus died in our place, it would be wrong for God to punish us for the sins Christ died for. Faith recongnizes that Jesus is our saviour who lived the life that we cannot live. Jesus perfectly obeyed the law of God, so that the law is upheld and we are not against the law.

Now, that’s interesting…I like the distinction between sins. Its important to make, so that we don’t beat ourselves up forever,say, over a nickel we secretly pinched at the age of 8.
But I am:ehh: troubled by the fact that the only difference you regard is private vs public sin. Private murder is surely of rather more import than the aforementioned privately purloined nickel–Is it not???

I made the distinction here in order to show what we must do after we repent, but sin can be divided into other ways. The first table of commandments deals with how we are to worship God and the second half is how we are to relate to our neighbor. But every sin deserveth God’s wrath and curse, both in this life, and that which is to come including murder that is commited in the heart and thefts of lesser value.