W
wina
Guest
I haven’t read all posts, but I need to know calvinist teaching about salvation. Example someone has been chosen to be saved but he has sins and he doesn’t repent. Will he still be saved? Any thought?
- Status
G
guanophore
Guest
This is not consistent with Scripture, which a relection of Apostolic teaching, therefore, it does not represent what the Apostles taught.
S
sandusky
Guest
:yup: That’s consistent with scripture.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Semantics again.
Calvinists teach that God CHOOSES those who will seek him.
All others are therefore condemned.
Your inability to connect the dots can only be temporary. It is not a difficult logical pathway to follow.
S
sandusky
Guest
God teaches that He CHOOSES those He’ll save, and the others are left dead in their sins.
S
Steadfast
Guest
Okay, ready?
You’re right. God chooses whom He will save and the rest are left to get what they deserve which is death and hell.
This is what Calvinists believe and it’s what they’ve been saying in this thread consistently.
I am glad to see that you have nuanced your presentation since the original post.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
This means God also chooses those who will go to hell through no fault of their own. God created us, and if it is not in our nature to seek him it is his fault. Thankfully, God loves us and he reaches out to all men through the Holy Spirit who convicts the entire world of sin. God wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.
Calvinists claim that God’s grace only reaches out to the elect and that he sends the rest of humanity to Hell.
This is inaccurate and not biblical.
Is this what you mean by nuanced?
R
Reformed
Guest
Do you understand that God created Adam and Eve and declared it to be very good? God did not create us in a status of rebellion with Him. Adam sinned on our behalf through his own free will. I thought Roman Catholics believed in original sin? Please explain whay you mean by “no fault of their own”? The Bible proclaims that ALL are without excuse.
Don’t you believe that Adam is our representative in our fallen state? Don’t you believe that the 2nd Adam is our representative as Christians? Do you believe all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. Don’t you think all are without excuse through general revelation? Why do you continue to talk back to the potter (Rom 9) because we are the clay (dust)?
I think you believe God is obligated to save all mankind. What does mercy, grace, fariness, and justice mean to you? Why don’t you pray for fairness and ask God to give you what you deserve which is fair. I’m a wretched sinner deserving of the eternal wrath of God; therefore, I will plead for mecy and grace that is found in Christ alone. God owes us justice, will you plead for justice or grace? God’s justice requires wrath and Hell for those who rebel against Him. Justice is fairness.
C
Contarini
Guest
I’d love to hear you explain sometime your views on this–in what sense do or don’t you think that God predestined Adam to fall?
I don’t think God plays legal games. I do think that we fell in Adam, but I don’t think we are responsible for what Adam did.
Oh, much more than that. I know that this is an election year in the U.S., but God’s kingdom doesn’t work by representation
Indeed.
I do not find Calvin’s interpretation of this to be tenable. If blindness would excuse us, but we aren’t excusable because we are not completely blind, but we are so close to blind that we can’t actually benefit from general revelation, then obviously we are no less excusable than if we were completely blind. Perhaps this is just a problem with the way Calvin chickened out with his metaphors. I can certainly understand the argument that since our failure to heed general revelation comes from the depravity of our wills, and not any defect in the revelation, therefore we remain inexcusable. I am not really that interested in an argument from justice, since I think it’s rather difficult to talk about justice in the relationship of Creator and Creature. But we can talk about goodness and mercy.
Because we are made in the Potter’s image, and because God has revealed to us that He is gracious and slow to anger. The “talking back” that Paul condemns there is the claim (by Jews, but of course the rest of us are just as prone to it) that God is somehow obligated to choose certain people because they are special. He is not saying that God’s goodness is a meaningless term; he is saying that God acts based on His own goodness and not because He owes us something.
“Obligated” is the wrong word. God is by definition infinitely gracious and merciful. Therefore we can be confident that God desires the salvation of all–and in fact Scripture tells us this explicitly.
For grace, obviously. But not just for myself–for all those who are sinners as I am, and who I must assume have quite likely abused the riches of God’s grace far less than I.
Edwin
R
Reformed
Guest
I’m am not tied with John Calvin or Calvinism. I know this is a Calvin thread. I think all Christians will agree that God did not create evil, or pedestined Adam to fall and rebel. I believe God could have prevented Adam from sinning. He did not have to create Lucifier, or He could have prevented Lucifier and the fallen angels from rebelling. He did not have to test Adam and Eve by commanding them not to eat from the tree of knowledge. I try to not go beyond Scripture, even though we all do.
I have come to the conclusion that God does all things for His own glory…because He is a God of all glory. Whatever He does, allows,permits, prevents is God-centered for His own glory. However, what He does is glorious worthy of praise and worship. I believe God allowed the fall to manifest His glory to us and Angels …to the praise of His glorious grace. “God demonstrated His love for us that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us”. The cross is so glorious, what else can compare with it in our finite minds? I do believe Romans 5 is federal headship for both groups of humanity. Do you agree or reject headship and Adam and the 2nd Adam being the representative for the two groups of humanity? Paul writes by saying “in Christ” in union with Christ, ect.
I have come to the conclusion that God does all things for His own glory…because He is a God of all glory. Whatever He does, allows,permits, prevents is God-centered for His own glory. However, what He does is glorious worthy of praise and worship. I believe God allowed the fall to manifest His glory to us and Angels …to the praise of His glorious grace. “God demonstrated His love for us that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us”. The cross is so glorious, what else can compare with it in our finite minds? I do believe Romans 5 is federal headship for both groups of humanity. Do you agree or reject headship and Adam and the 2nd Adam being the representative for the two groups of humanity? Paul writes by saying “in Christ” in union with Christ, ect.
S
sandusky
Guest
Calvinists adhere to sola scriptura, and scripture establishes, clearly, that the fault for going to hell is found within the individual.
Again, scripture establishes that none seek for God, and it’s not God’s fault that they don’t seek him, but that the fault for that is found within the individual.
According to scripture, the Spirit convicts men of more than sin only.
That’s what God’s commanded men to do, but many disobey God.
God gifts all men with grace, but He gifts only the elect with saving grace.
Those who go to hell go to hell not because of sin, as God is willing to forgive their sin, they go to hell because they are disobedient to the Gospel.
R
Reformed
Guest
The Judgment at Christ’s Coming - 2 Thes 1God gifts all men with grace, but He gifts only the elect with saving grace.
Those who go to hell go to hell not because of sin, as God is willing to forgive their sin, they go to hell because they are disobedient to the Gospel.
5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— 6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from [2] the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed. 11 To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his calling and may fulfill every resolve for good and every work of faith by his power, 12 so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
F
fbl9
Guest
disobedient to the gospelGod gifts all men with grace, but He gifts only the elect with saving grace.
Those who go to hell go to hell not because of sin, as God is willing to forgive their sin, they go to hell because they are disobedient to the Gospel.
of who Calvin’s…no they don’t go to hell for disobeying the gospel,you said it is b/c they aren’t given grace that saves…that seems rather cruel,to give one grace yet withhold from the one saving grace…so then one who is elect can sin unrepentedly,(if they didn’t know they are of the elect)till they die and then God will forgive them…
R
Reformed
Guest
How about considering the Holy Scriptures for discernment?disobedient to the gospel
The Judgment at Christ’s Coming - 2 Thes 1
5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— 6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from [2] the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed. 11 To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his calling and may fulfill every resolve for good and every work of faith by his power, 12 so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
F
fbl9
Guest
are you attempting to imply that i don’t read scripture??still doesn’t explain how one knows they are given saving grace and not just grace that does NOTHING…
B
Byron_Bramwell
Guest
I am myself a Protestant (after the Calvinist tradition) who is heavily leaning towards Catholicism. I have grown, through both prayer and reading of Scripture, to disagree strongly with the Calvinist model of double predestination (I feel it compares very little to the Augustinian). However, your description is one that is hardly accurate.
Catholics are always complaining about the gross misrepresentations Protestants manufacture of their beliefs; and they are very correct to do so. These misrepresentations are due, largely, to misconceptions. In your case, it appears the reverse is true. You obviously know nothing of Calvinism apart from the straw men assembled by Semi-pelagian sympathizers.
Calvinists believe that man is free to do as he pleases. They also believe that God has predestined all things, and yet is not the cause of evil.
My greatest problem with Catholicism is its Thomistic aspects concerning free will. It seems that it takes great issue with God “forcing” Himself upon a person. Free will becomes such a sacred treasure to the Catholic that they place their concept of justice and impose upon the infinite God of the universe. Free will theodicies are foolish attempts to acquit the Judge of all things. Here is the greatest of theodicies: God is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent being who has created heaven and earth from nothing and will one day bring His chosen people to heaven with Him; while those who refuse Him will suffer for eternity in Hell; and this is justice, why?: because God, by His very definition, determines what is just and what is unjust. And we, the pitiful creatures we are, must humbly submit to His perfect justice and plead for the forgiveness we do not deserve.
It is my experience that those who are so deeply offended by the prospect of God’s foreordaining people to Hell without first doing an ounce of research on the subject, or spouting off at the mouth with fool’s words, have very little, if not any reverence for the Almighty.
May His will be done. Even if that will includes my damnation.
The basic alternatives are these:
Thomistic: do we limit God to our own understandings of logical and moral possibilities?
or
Augustinian: do we submit to God our ignorance of His perfect judgments.
Sincerely in Christ,
Byron
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
I enjoyed your post and I now will attempt to shred it if I can. You made some challenging points.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
Chester:
Are you ever wrong?
Just curious.
O+
Are you ever wrong?
Just curious.
O+
B
Byron_Bramwell
Guest
I think you are being slightly disingenous here.
Let me clarify that I am speaking of conservative 5 points Calvinism. I know that many Calvinists hold some variation of this most conservative dogma.
Still, if a man is created with no ability to please God without God’s grace intervening, and this grace never intervenes, then this man does not have free will. He can ONLY choose destruction.
Do you agree?
Man was created with the ability to please God. But in Adam we all died. It seems that your error lies in your application of the fall to the entirety of man. Total Depravity, the first of the 5 points of Calvinism, does not mean that we are depraved through and through, without a bit of good in us. Rather, it is saying that there is not one part of the whole of man that is not touched by the consequence of Adam’s sin; this includes our logic and our sense of morality.
To answer your question then, NO. I do not believe that man has the ability, on his own power, to choose God.
Do YOU think that man can incline himself to God apart from the intervention of grace?
Then my friend, I misjudged you in relating your argument to Semi-Pelagianism. If you honestly believe that there is some spark in the human will, separate from the goodness of God’s perfect grace, that can choose what is infinitely above Him, then you are of the purest of Pelagians.
You are missing the key component of the belief in free will. We believe God loves all men. This love is offered to all men and God wants us to return his love. Love cannot be forced or it is not truly love.
Could an omnipotent God create free creatures with the option of choosing or rejecting his love? Of course he could. We believe this is what God chose to do by his SOVEREIGN will. This in no way limits, but rather accentuates, his glory and power.
Have you ever attempted to interject the attribute of omniscience into your homegrown systematics? Are we free if we cannot do otherwise? God knows the next letter I will type; does this remove my freedom to do so? NO. I do it willingly, and yet it is in perfect conformity with the ultimate workings of God.
Yes. God is sovereign. Yes. God can create free creatures. No. We cannot, being stained by the original sin of the fall of Adam, reach within US and offer to God a thing pleasing to Him.
Are your good works your own as well? Or do you believe that God has predestined the good that works within and without us?
That’s your problem. Find some more intellectual friends!
It is not an intellectual problem necessarily. YOU have a problem with intellectuals? Perhaps you should consider another name then, Chesterton.
Not buying that sentiment, sorry.
I am not selling it.
Most Catholics find no conflict between Augustine and Aquinas with regard to grace. However, neither of their opinions is Catholic dogma.
The two primary camps are the Thomists and Molinists.
I don’t find your descriptions accurate. Augustine was a strong proponent of reason and Aquinas was a strong believer in the need for grace.
Molinism? Are you serious? This is a PRIMARY CAMP in Cathoicism???
That is… depressing…
There is a significant distinction in Thomistic thought in its Aristotelian influences. Aquinas built his theological framework upon the naked logic of humanity, corresponding Scripture to his arguments when he could find one to support them.
Augustine, however, though a man of reason, gave both reason and revelation their proper place. Reason is the slave of revelation, not the master.
Do you find Aquinas’ FIVE WAYS to be sufficient in proving the existence of God beyond doubt?
If so, then you would be consistent with your own position of human autonomy; and you would have removed revelation completely from reason, and left reason to stand on its own to fathom the Father of all things.
Is our natural reason able to obtain the communicability of God’s natural revelation?
Sincerely in Christ,
Byron
Let me clarify that I am speaking of conservative 5 points Calvinism. I know that many Calvinists hold some variation of this most conservative dogma.
Still, if a man is created with no ability to please God without God’s grace intervening, and this grace never intervenes, then this man does not have free will. He can ONLY choose destruction.
Do you agree?
Man was created with the ability to please God. But in Adam we all died. It seems that your error lies in your application of the fall to the entirety of man. Total Depravity, the first of the 5 points of Calvinism, does not mean that we are depraved through and through, without a bit of good in us. Rather, it is saying that there is not one part of the whole of man that is not touched by the consequence of Adam’s sin; this includes our logic and our sense of morality.
To answer your question then, NO. I do not believe that man has the ability, on his own power, to choose God.
Do YOU think that man can incline himself to God apart from the intervention of grace?
Then my friend, I misjudged you in relating your argument to Semi-Pelagianism. If you honestly believe that there is some spark in the human will, separate from the goodness of God’s perfect grace, that can choose what is infinitely above Him, then you are of the purest of Pelagians.
You are missing the key component of the belief in free will. We believe God loves all men. This love is offered to all men and God wants us to return his love. Love cannot be forced or it is not truly love.
Could an omnipotent God create free creatures with the option of choosing or rejecting his love? Of course he could. We believe this is what God chose to do by his SOVEREIGN will. This in no way limits, but rather accentuates, his glory and power.
Have you ever attempted to interject the attribute of omniscience into your homegrown systematics? Are we free if we cannot do otherwise? God knows the next letter I will type; does this remove my freedom to do so? NO. I do it willingly, and yet it is in perfect conformity with the ultimate workings of God.
Yes. God is sovereign. Yes. God can create free creatures. No. We cannot, being stained by the original sin of the fall of Adam, reach within US and offer to God a thing pleasing to Him.
Are your good works your own as well? Or do you believe that God has predestined the good that works within and without us?
That’s your problem. Find some more intellectual friends!
It is not an intellectual problem necessarily. YOU have a problem with intellectuals? Perhaps you should consider another name then, Chesterton.
Not buying that sentiment, sorry.
I am not selling it.
Most Catholics find no conflict between Augustine and Aquinas with regard to grace. However, neither of their opinions is Catholic dogma.
The two primary camps are the Thomists and Molinists.
I don’t find your descriptions accurate. Augustine was a strong proponent of reason and Aquinas was a strong believer in the need for grace.
Molinism? Are you serious? This is a PRIMARY CAMP in Cathoicism???
That is… depressing…
There is a significant distinction in Thomistic thought in its Aristotelian influences. Aquinas built his theological framework upon the naked logic of humanity, corresponding Scripture to his arguments when he could find one to support them.
Augustine, however, though a man of reason, gave both reason and revelation their proper place. Reason is the slave of revelation, not the master.
Do you find Aquinas’ FIVE WAYS to be sufficient in proving the existence of God beyond doubt?
If so, then you would be consistent with your own position of human autonomy; and you would have removed revelation completely from reason, and left reason to stand on its own to fathom the Father of all things.
Is our natural reason able to obtain the communicability of God’s natural revelation?
Sincerely in Christ,
Byron
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
I believe man gives all of us enough grace to be saved. We can’t be saved without this grace, and we won’t be saved if we don’t respond to God’s grace.
God wants all men to be saved. So, either all men are saved, OR, there are things we can do, that God does not wish for us to do, that lead to our condemnation. I believe the latter is the case.
More specifically, the primary camps for those who concern themselves with predestination and grace as a theological debate.Molinism? Are you serious? This is a PRIMARY CAMP in Cathoicism???
That is… depressing…
What is your problem with Molinism?
I don’t buy the ontological argument, but the other four seem to be to share a common theme, which I find compelling. Something came first and took action. Is this proof of God beyond doubt? No.
I don’t believe there must be a conflict between reason and revelation.
They are complimentary. Like it or not, you use your reason to make sense of any personal revelations or the revelations given to others.
- Status