Reformed Theology: Somewhere Between..

[musterion]

This is a little like asking if God is not good because many are going to hell, isn't it?

Unless you are an Open Theist, you approach the topic after a similar fashion as I do, but even the Open Theist claims God is Omnicompetent, thus there is a logical problem with all men not being saved. We are both opposed to Universal salvation. After a crude fashion, we are on the same page, just getting there a different way. I understand scrutiny and appreciate it. Thanks for asking. I prefer scrutiny to 'guilty!'

Certainly ask more questions (please) if this does not suffice for answer. I had written something much longer but thought to pare it down for your ease of reading as well as allow you to drive the questions and discussion on this point.
In Him, -Lon

I'll wait for you to stop talking around my points. None of this is smiley worthy, please show some gravity.

 

[Lon]

You post did little to respond to my issues. Just more of the standard pretentious Lon I have read before.

Enjoy the weekend.

There is always a 'disgruntling' and complaining tenor to much off-topic accusation. In this, your two posts weren't really much but accusation and especially with judgmental commentary. While banter is part of TOL, it doesn't have to be inane nor disrupt the OP of every thread. So, the judgmental is what rankles. If you are going to provide your own commentary to over-assert, when already off-topic, it often amounts to contentious banter. Does that explain why the problem?

As far as responding to your issue, I don't really know what it is, asked and didn't report you for trolling! Are you sure you aren't being a troll here? Are you positive? :doh: Good gravy, I'm being 'nice' to you, even though I am questioning your demeanor, content, and intentions. The ball was in your court! Be clear what your comments and questions are supposed to be accomplishing. I actually would like to address your concern if I can. You are an atheist by choice. Do you 'want' God to save you, if He can? What are you doing about it?

 

[patrick jane]

The churches who adhere to Reformed doctrine are just like any other Christian and believe in good fruits and faith.
You all simply make a delusional misrepresentation of it, only seeing it the way you want to see it. Calvinism is a very graceful and fulfilling set of beliefs- not the theologically unsound, flip flopping shenanigans of others. You all change out like socks: one day a sinner, another a saint. Or where one doctrine fails, another comes and saves the day- it's all nonsense. Only TULIP is real.

I'm sorry for you.

 

[Crucible]

Your god loves his creation so much that he decided ahead of time who gets to spend an eternity in hell? What kind of love is that?

And you wonder why people with any sense look at Christian theology and walk away.

Atheists have the depth and intuition of an anthill so I wouldn't expect any less of a reply from you to be perfectly honest.

I don't 'wonder' anything, the Word is a sword. It's supposed to offend. If you want someone to tell you what you want to here, then stay away from Reformed Christians :wave:

 

[Lon]

I'll wait for you to stop talking around my points. None of this is smiley worthy, please show some gravity.

Yes it warranted it. I was 'thanking' you for questioning rather than pronouncing guilt. That WAS a good thing and I appreciated. After that, I asked you to steer this conversation and allow for your agenda because I appreciated your asking questions!

Let's revisit talking around points:

Lon,

The idea that some are "unsavable" solely due to His decree for them in eternity past still doesn't pose a problem for you?

No. And like it or not, not for you either and I'll prove and show the point after your response.

Really?

Yes really. PM me if you are Open Theist or tell me in thread. It will affect how this conversation progresses because I'd have to use more explanation to meet your concerns satisfaction.

And they err in overemphasizing His grace and love over His holiness and justice.

If such is done, if it is done to a lesser degree, can't that be considered problematic too?

This is where you err, which is why I addressed that specific question to you - if God determined in eternity pas[t] who is and is not saved (which you accept as true on its face), then the Gospel is a sham: all who are fated to believe it are already unthwartably safe by virtue of election; the rest have no hope but the Lake. The Gospel is a mere formality for the elect and the ultimate prank on the reprobate.

We are in this mess by our own actions. God decreed, but did not put us here. There is a difference between decree and ordained, and authoring the same and there is no expectation for saving some verses saving all. God didn't leave us willnilly. Even the OV claims God is omnicompetent. "To what end?" I believe He is more than competent, that He knows exactly what He is doing in the salvation process.

This isn't a matter of what He foreknows...it's about what Reformed theology claims He actively decreed for ALL. It makes Bible Christianity just a more refined form of typical pagan fatalism where the eternity of everyone is unalterably set before they're born.

Yes, but we are authors too. I still don't like chocolate much. If my life depended on it, perhaps I could learn to like it, but I was born not liking it. God decreed this. It 1) doesn't make Him the author of my 'problem' but of my situation. 2) It doesn't excuse me from eating chocolate, if it saves my life. 3) Make me like chocolate. Me dying from lack of chocolate is 'my' problem.

The god of Calvinism is false.

Guilty until proven innocent then? I'd sure love to see the paperwork and court proceedings :think:

 

[This Charming Manc]

I'm an Armenian with a strong nod to aspects of reformed theology, I find its emphasis on grace and work of Christ is very good balance to some of the charismatic/pentecostal arminianism theology I grew up in the lord with.

I have understandings of total depravity and unmerited favour, that a strict Calvinist would disagree with, but gives a strong nod in that direction.

Limited atonement and irresistible grace I have no truck with feel they fly in the clear plain and obvious teaching of Scripture, but are needed in a strong Calvinist position to support a strict interpretation of the earlier points.

On the matter of perseverance of the saints I hold a position I term as eternal security which is that God holds our salvation and we cannot loose it by sinning, but i'm prone to think we can throw it away by a complete denial of Jesus.

I'm sure some will disagree and call me an old fashion arminian but I have gained much better balance to my faith my engaging with reformed theology.

Please be respectful and do not disrespect anyone(no matter their comments)

So, about a year ago a good friend of mine introduced reformed theology to me. My first thought was,"ummm what?", but as he explainned the thought behind it, the more I could see some agreement I have always had. I do no not hold to all five points of Calvinism. The truth is im torn between.

Any thoughts on reformed theology?

 

[Lon]

it does matter what you do

don't you agree?

David murdered a man and was adulterous. Did it matter to God? What do you mean by this? For the Calvinist, it matters what God is doing, not what man does. This is part of why TULIP is a whole package, as Manc suggests. It all ties together.

that is nonsense

why don't you have the guts to say

it doesn't matter what you do

It doesn't. You are correct. All MAD agree but not all Open Theists agree. Catholics are man-ward focused as to whether they are 'Christian' or not 'saved' or not. It depends nearly entirely upon man if he is saved or not, in Catholic theology, then? (reflective question)

It is a good question because in this thread we have representatives of those who are mostly man-centered in their own Christianity, to hold and keep it by works with a tiny bit of help by the Spirit, AS, tradition, and the Church.
The rest fall within a man/God cooperation and then the Calvinist, who believes salvation is solely the work of God, that no man can boast. Ephesians 2:8-10

 

[chrysostom]

it does matter what you do

don't you agree?

David murdered a man and was adulterous. Did it matter to God? What do you mean by this?

what do I mean by this?

this is rich, a calvinist asking me what I mean

it matters what you do
it will determine your salvation
we are still at the mercy of God
but
God will choose us based on what we do
it is the only thing that makes sense
do you know what that means?????

 

[TulipBee]

How's that working our for you? Lots of evil in the world, either your reformed god is not very good at what you think he does or he allows certain evil. If the first then he is not very "godlike", if the second he is just playing with us for his own amusement.

All mankind being totally depraved is already hell and you want to tell God you deserve better treatment? God called and none answered cause Adam made all of us deaf.

 

[TulipBee]

Do you have concerns about the idea of God damning people for unbelief when not believing is exactly what He intended they do?

Mankind damned themselves and you blame God? On judgement day, God is going to ask you why you have a gun pointing at Him demanding you deserve better.

 

[Crucible]

Do you have concerns about the idea of God damning people for unbelief when not believing is exactly what He intended they do?

This argument gets old.

If you were given 'free will', what choices would you make differently then what you do now?

Understanding predestination requires a more forensic perspective which, if you do not attend, you will not understand.

Rejecting Calvinism is all about masquerading dull perception in some higher morality.

 

[Lon]

This isn't a matter of what He foreknows...it's about what Reformed theology claims He actively decreed for ALL. It makes Bible Christianity just a more refined form of typical pagan fatalism where the eternity of everyone is unalterably set before they're born.

Btw, Hilston addresses this concern. We are not talking about fatalism, but rather that God determines after His own counsel as the only Independent. We aren't as godlike as we think we are, thus the accusation against Calvinism is often from a predisposition to think we are in a place of independence (and I too was/am there). I have a knowledge of good and evil, but it is a result of the Fall that I possess it. That means, I have something that God ordained, but prescribed rather than decreed in remedy. This is an infralapsarian sublapsarian supralapsarian discussion, however (the article does a fairly good job of explanation though 'allow' is not exactly right). It is important to understand when you are building a strawman against Calvinism, rather than actually understanding it (a great thread for address perception vs reality regarding Calvinism and Hilston isn't a Calvinist). We aren't always as hard to get or understand, nor always against the rest of Christendom in our theology as we are often portrayed.

 

[Lon]

what do I mean by this?

this is rich, a calvinist asking me what I mean

This is confusing. Why would it matter whether I was Calvinist or not, for asking???

Let me be specific: "Does it matter" to my salvation? To God? to other men? What are you asking that it matters in connection with. David clearly shows it did not affect his salvation. Psalm 32. Why would a Catholic go to confession if his sins were counted against him/her? "Does it matter?"

In addition, what does 'matter' mean? What are you asking that sin matters to?

it matters what you do
it will determine your salvation
we are still at the mercy of God
but
God will choose us based on what we do
it is the only thing that makes sense
do you know what that means?????

No. David was adulterous (and had concubines he never married) then murdered Bathsheba's husband, and then brought her in as his wife. So no, I have no idea what "does it matter?" means. I have to ask.


Let me try, but if I miss, let me know: If it matters what I do, and what David did, to our salvation, then he and I are lost (and I haven't committed adultery or even fornication, and I haven't murdered anybody, nor taken another man's wife! nor cheated on mine!)

When you say does it matter, as far as I understand the Cross, it doesn't matter, my sins are all buried. We all keep sinning after salvation, in the sense that we still lie as far as the flesh, or we still get unrighteously angry, or we hurt another being. But this is confusing 'wrong' with 'sin.' Sin, specifically, is only against God.

David, in Psalm 32 said that 'against God alone' he had sinned. It was a foretelling of us in Christ: Our sins, though they 'affect' others are not 'sins' against others, they are fouls, hurts, etc. "Sin" is specifically against God, and it is taken care of at the Cross. There is no more sin, persay.

I think this is what MADists are getting at too, btw, when they say they no longer sin. They aren't saying they don't hurt people or wrong people, they are saying they no longer wrong God, because Christ's work sucks it up into nothingness and buries it gone, forever. I have a lot of agreement with them concerning our standing in Christ. I think, however, this isn't so much about election vs predestination :think:

God will choose us based on what we do
it is the only thing that makes sense

Then only some Catholics who don't go to confession will be saved because they'd be the only ones that don't need to? The rest of you, by confession, are still being judged on "what you do" accordingly? It seems only the perfect Catholic can be saved. Paul wrote about the law in Romans. It is a great book. I 'think' Catholics should read it, apart from Catholic commentary. The Law was God-given too, but Paul makes a great case against works-based salvation and distinguishes between sins against God vs, ills against man. If you realize I think the scripture makes a huge distinction between sin against God, vs things against man, and that the Cross 100% covers the former, I think you'll appreciate, at least where we differ. -Lon

 

[Crucible]

Calvin wins by epic beard

 

[Clete]

Please be respectful and do not disrespect anyone(no matter their comments)


So, about a year ago a good friend of mine introduced reformed theology to me. My first thought was,"ummm what?", but as he explainned the thought behind it, the more I could see some agreement I have always had. I do no not hold to all five points of Calvinism. The truth is im torn between.

Any thoughts on reformed theology?

You cannot hold to part of the T.UL.I.P. doctrines. They're very much an all or nothing package deal as is the rest of the Reformed doctrinal system.

Reformed theology (here after; Calvinism) is based on the Greek philosophical idea that God cannot change AT ALL. Utter, absolute, completely exhaustive immutability is the core doctrine of the whole system. All of what you understand as Calvinism; the five points of the TULIP Divine Impassibility, Predestination & the Classical understanding of the omni-doctrines (omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence); all of it derives logically from the single premise the God is utterly immutable. Thus, as I said, you cannot take part of it. It's all or nothing. That is assuming you want to believe in something that is rationally coherent.

If you're interested in having what I just said substantiated, the historical material is extensive and detailed and irrefutable and even unchallenged. That is to say that the historical and philosophical basis for what is called Calvinism or Reformed Theology is so clear and the evidence so obvious that not even Calvinists will deny it except in ignorance. One of the clearest and most concise treatments I've found is here...

Calvinism Unmasked – by Bob Hill

That link is to a pdf that's only 32 pages long. I've see whole books, ten times that long on the topic.

I should point out that while Calvinists do not deny (usually) the veracity of the historical origins of their doctrines, its not because they think that such a historical basis is a valid way to form a doctrine. Its because they don't care about the historical basis for their doctrine. They say things like, "Who cares where Luther got the doctrine of Immutability so long as he got it!" The problem with this sort of thinking is obvious, it seems, to everyone but them.

I'm out of time for now but I leave you, for now, with one final thought...

Contradictions do not exist! Do not accept Calvinism, any of it, unless and until you can be made to see with your own mind how what they teach about who does and who does not get saved is consistent with the concept of justice. You cannot accept Calvinism without transmuting the concept of justice into its opposite. God is either just or He is arbitrary. He cannot be both.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Nick M]

I have a desire to know him and i am challenged with scripture like Romans 9.

What about it?

 

[Nick M]

Died for all in what way?

Just was served for sin.

We know all are not saved, so what was the Christ's death all about for those that are not saved?

AMR

His death is not salvation. Receiving his life is salvation. And it is a gift that people reject.

 

[Nick M]

God's providence has been active since creation, so I fail to see how Our Lord's death is connected to this.
AMR

See, I told you so.


1 Corinthians 1

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

 

[Nick M]

This is only an example of a future event when the Lord Jesus Chris separates the wheat from the chaff.

 

[theophilus]

ARMcCarley,

A great sermon showing the parallel relationships between grace and freewill: http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0207.htm

May help you a little.