Calvinism

[Ktoyou]

We have faith as a consequence of God having chosen us (before the foundation of the world).

That is one position

 

[iouae]

Already debunked....

In the absence of any theory, any theory is a better theory.

 

[Clete]

Right. Incidentally I think that most Calvinists would agree that the Holy Spirit does indwell believers at the point of believe (and probably not before) and that this is, in fact, the earnest payment guaranteeing the safe deliver to God on the day of redemption.

The question is, why can the man resist and reject the work of the Holy Spirit before conversion, but apparently not after?

Could not a person make another free will decision to give back that earnest payment?

If no, then why does it appear that man has more freedom to reject the ministry of the Holy Spirit before conversion than he does after?


There is no reason to believe that regenerated, justified and glorified humans ever need to be forced to stay in heaven.

So why don't they want to leave?



Why yes, yes I just did.


I've got a "no contact" policy with that loser.

Your questions cannot be answered, at least not directly, because they beg the question - in the logical sense of the phrase.

In other words, your questions only make sense from a Calvinist perspective. If Calvinism is false, all of your questions answer themselves or never get asked in the first place.

"Why does it appear that man has more freedom to reject the ministry of the Holy Spirit before conversion than he does after?"​

He doesn't!

That question doesn't even make sense. It's like asking me "Why can't we beat God at a game of marbles?" or "Why can't we make God do something He would otherwise refuse to do?". The answer is, "You can't because He's God!" It makes no sense to even ask the question.
It's God's plan of salvation, not mine! God clearly explains that it is our part to believe and His part to redeem. If He decides that those who believe will be brought safely to the day of redemption then they will be so brought - period. Just because I believe that men have a free will does not mean that I believe that they can do anything at all, like undo God's plan of salvation. The fact is that Christ's death permits God to justly show mercy. He has chosen to show mercy to those who believe. Perhaps its as simple as accepting that there is some specific reason God wants to make such a guarantee that we are not shown in scripture but that will be made clear when we see Him face to face.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Already debunked....

I don't agree with your position concerning the unevangelized but I must agree that your post did debunk his argument.

Fair is fair.

 

[iouae]

If you believe this, it isn't because the bible tells you so.

Rev 20 says nothing whatsoever of this. What that chapter does say is that they will be judged according to what they have done. Its a judgment of works, which, as Paul consistently points out, won't get you into heaven.


And if you allow that passage to speak for itself you will realize that God gives the interpretation of that vision so that we don't have to make one up.

Then he said to me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are indeed cut off.' Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel. And you shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the LORD; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the LORD." (Ezekiel 37:11-14 ESV)​

God says exactly who the dries bones represent.

This passage isn't about those who didn't have the testimony of God, it was about those who did and rejected. Israel wasn't cut off because they never heard about God's revelation, they were cut off because they did hear and rejected His revelation.

This passage says exactly the opposite of what you are trying to make it say. You want this passage to be about those who have never heard, those who never got a chance to hear about God. The passage tells us that it is about those who did hear and rejected.


You believe this in error my friend.

Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

Matthew 12:42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Likewise the Panamanian who lived BC will rise up with the men of Nineveh, the Queen of the South, and the House of Israel in the 8M, to hear the word of the Lord.

The people of Nineveh did not receive the Gospel to be saved back in Jonah's day, so then, in the 8M they will be even more receptive than the Jew who heard Christ and already rejected Him.

 

[iouae]

Folks err thinking the future Judgment is a Judge delivering a verdict.

Judgment is a few years of living to decide if you want to be a sheep or a goat in the 8M.

 

[Dialogos]

Oh!Good. I thought you were ignoring my posts. My appologies for referring to you in the third person.

Nah.

I don't have very many folks on ignore. Its pretty dumb to hold online grudges IMHO.

You're good people Clete, we just disagree on some things.

I still think its a bit of a trick and this is certainly not Calvinist theology.

I'll let the other Calvinists confirm or deny that what I believe is consistent with Calvinism. I'll cite Sproul later as another Calvinist whose beliefs are consistent with my own answer here.

The trick is that you, presuming that you haven't left Calvinism altogether, believe in Irresistible Grace (The "I" in TULIP). In other words, what you call "regeneration by the Spirit" is practically, essentially and logically the exact same thing as being made to believe because you hold to the notion that the regenerate cannot do otherwise.

Regeneration by the Spirit makes us able to believe and gives us the heart to believe. I resist the notion of "forcing" someone to believe because I think this is a subtle straw man argument.

I side with Sproul here:

"It is not that the Holy Spirit drags people kicking and screaming to Christ against their wills. The Holy Spirit changes the inclination and disposition of our wills, so that whereas we were previously unwilling to embrace Christ, now we are willing, and more than willing. Indeed, we aren’t dragged to Christ, we run to Christ, and we embrace Him joyfully because the Spirit has changed our hearts. They are no longer hearts of stone that are impervious to the commands of God and to the invitations of the gospel. God melts the hardness of our hearts when He makes us new creatures. The Holy Spirit resurrects us from spiritual death, so that we come to Christ because we want to come to Christ. The reason we want to come to Christ is because God has already done a work of grace in our souls. Without that work, we would never have any desire to come to Christ. That’s why we say that regeneration precedes faith. (Sproul, TULIP and Reformed Theology: Irresistible Grace)​

This is just semantics!

Its semantics because you do not mean irresistible in the sense of something that is really really desirable but you mean it in a literal sense where there is no choice about it. Its no different than believing that God puts a ring in your nose.

Sproul and I disagree with you here. Its more than mere semantics. God doesn't drag anyone kicking and screaming into the kingdom as you suggest we secretly believe. He overcomes the natural inclination toward rebellion that we are all born with as sons and daughters of our fallen first parents and when the hardness of our hearts melt we run to Christ rather than run away from Him.

There are those who have done far worse than that! Lucifer stood in the direct presence of God the Father as did a full third of the angelic host and they all CHOSE to rebel against God. You deny that they chose, of course but that doesn't change the fact that they did so.

I don't deny that Lucifer chose to rebel against God.

Don't be too nice to me though, people will start to think that you're not a real Calvinist!

:chuckle:

 

[Bright Raven]

BR,

Calvinists do not say this. Rather, we say he who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.

We further say that those that call upon the name of the Lord are chosen by God before they were born and His choice is not based upon any merit of these persons. Hence, the name "elect" as used in Scripture. Moreover, God does not reveal who these "elect" persons are so we are commanded by God to spread the Good News promiscuously, for it is by the ordinary means of the hearing of the Gospel that the elect of God are brought into the Kingdom.

The distinction between the non-Calvinist and the Calvinist is that the non-Calvinist believes he or she has the autonomy to actually choose to believe. The non-Calvinist also declares that God gives this type of "free will" to all his moral creatures. So, when God created all that exists, he looked down the corridors of time, saw who will choose rightly, and declared them the "elect". (Note: open theists, who deny God knows the future, generally would have God being very, very, smart, and able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will believe.)

Does this clarify things for you, BR?

AMR

Partially, do you believe that Non-Calvinists can be saved by calling upon the name of the Lord?

 

[Clete]

Dialogos,

I fully believe that you are stating what you actually believe and doing so in good faith...

BUT...

It all rings fulling in my ears as just so much semantics. Let me demonstrate by asking you the following question...

Is it possible, even theoretically, for a 'regenerate' person to not "run to Christ", as you and Sproul put it?

If you answer that question with a "No", then my semantics objection is sustained. If you answer with a "yes", then you are not a Calvinist.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[musterion]

You just contradicted yourself.

Okay.

 

[Clete]

Okay.

That's it?

 

[musterion]

This is one of the explanations that Calvin gives that I probably reject.

How convenient. That way the insecurity of election-based saving faith and possible reprobation/spurious faith is completely avoided.

If you are a Southern Baptist, like the author of the article you cited, then you will likely respond in some fashion like the Calvinist does which is to claim that they never really were saved because God doesn't start something and then fail at it (Phil 1:6)

No. I would say they were never saved because they never believed the saving Gospel of the grace of God, which is in no way a failure of God's whatsoever.

What I never have understood is why some Arminians, or Open Theists for that matter, can believe in eternal security. If someone has the power and freedom to opt into believing in Christ then why can't they just opt out of believing in Christ.

The fact you would ask the question is what has led me, over the years, to wonder about many Calvinists as well as "Arminians." If you really don't know Paul's answer to that question - and if you did you wouldn't ask - then you possibly haven't believed his Gospel. But we've been over that many times, at length, as I have with "Arminians." I'm not going to bother anymore. They can't see it. Nor can you.

I do thank you for pointing out that some OTs reject UESIC. I never knew that but it explains some puzzling things I've read on TOL in the past. But given the premises of OT, I suppose it figures when they want to be as consistent as possible.

It would seem to me that eternal security is totally at odds with synergistic theologies of salvation.

:idunno:

It is, for both "Arminians" as well as Calvinists, but only when either is blinded by works gospels to a vital, blessed fact which Paul repeatedly taught, or are saved but so immature in the faith that they can't see it. Either way, I won't bother wasting my time trying to explain to you again.

Do you believe in eternal security Musterion?

I believe in UESIC (Unconditional Eternal Safety in Christ). It is more comprehensive than ES/OSAS and puts the focus where it should always be: on Him. It also is not perseverance of the saints.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Partially, do you believe that Non-Calvinists can be saved by calling upon the name of the Lord?

I most certainly do.

AMR

 

[Clete]

AMR,

Do you believe that God predestined me to believe in free will?

 

[Mocking You]

I stated that it is the non-Calvinist who thinks he or she possess the ability of choice to believe the Gospel. Hence, the non-Calvinists view their choice as something God "sees" from eternity and thereby ratifies.

Nope. Non-Calvinists may think they have the ability to choose to believe, but they don't necessarily think that God "looks down through the corridors of time" and ratifies it. That simply does not follow. SOME people might think that, but certainly not all, and probably not a majority of non-Cals.

The Calvinist views Scripture as teaching all progeny of Adam are fallen in Adam, that is we all are sinners from birth and sin because we are sinners. Accordingly, the person who is not yet "born again" (regenerated) possesses no moral ability to choose to believe the Good News.

AMR

This non-Cal believes that the Holy Spirit convinces and convicts a person that they are a sinner, that they are condemned to Hell by God because of their sin, that they need a savior, that salvation is by repentance and faith in the finished work of Jesus on the cross. Every step of the way the Holy Spirit is drawing the sinner.

At some point there is a moment where it all clicks into place, all things become clear, the TRUTH is revealed and saving faith results in the sinner. At this moment God regenerates the sinner. Man does not "flip the switch", God does it.

 

[Mocking You]

AMR,

Do you believe that God predestined me to believe in free will?

I thank God that he predestined me to be a non-Cal.

 

[musterion]

That's it?

I don't see the point in quarreling with you. We align on much but your OT is going to get in the way of some things on which neither of us will budge.

 

[Mocking You]

Sorry that question got lost in the fray.

I believe, that's how I know am am one of the elect.

Romans 10:9-10

There's a lot of "you", "you", "you" in those two verses. Sounds like man is taking part of the responsibility.

 

[Mocking You]

How do you know you are a regenerated believer?

Romans 8:14 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God.
15 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”
16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

 

[Clete]

I don't see the point in quarreling with you. We align on much but your OT is going to get in the way of some things on which neither of us will budge.

I wasn't quarreling but alright then, if you'd rather not discuss it I'll let it go.