Romans 8:29-30 Refuting Calvanism - Free will

superdave5221 · Jul 22, 2012

Posting #32:

You hit the nail well there. What frightens the free-willers and humanists [steoreotyping free willers with humanists] most of all is that man has no CONTROL over these matters and that God ALONE is in sovereign control (which says something about their spirituality)[Character judgement on someone's relationship with God]. This they hate. Because in their minds this make God a "dictator" who "forces" people to love Him. [not true, I won't call you a liar, I'll just assume you don't know what you are talking about]Their problem is that they do not understand the nature of sin and that God owes man absolutely NOTHING than just punishment for his great crimes against his Creator. [Again, not true, I can't speak for all free willers, as you seem to be able to, but I am very aware of my guilt and the need of a redeemer]They want to earn up for it,[Again not true, making a choice is not earning] they want a dead man to lovingly respond to a loving call. Well, it is not impossible (Jesus said clearly that it is IMPOSSIBLE), dead man do not love, dead men can not say "yes" to an "offer". They had to be quickened first, by the One that has power to do so.

As I said, I can't speak for all free willers, but I will readily admit that I cannot know or accept God without his making himself known to me, however, my contention is that once that has occurred, I still have to make the conscious decision to accept that free gift.

If you ask, instead of stereotyping, you can get the truth.

psychomom · Jul 22, 2012

I hope this is pertinent...but the longer I walk with the Lord, the more convinved I am that my "free will" as one redeemed may be used to either obey God, or disobey Him?
But no, since even my obedience comes through His strength, and never my own. If I do His will, it's by His will, strength, and grace. (Phil.2:13) So, perhaps I am "free" to disobey--that's what emanates from my flesh. Surely nothing good dwells in me (Romans 7:18), other than Christ!...in me...the hope of glory. ♥ (Col.1:17...and there's the will of God again)
So, I can't think how I could generate anything righteous in and of myself.

I see no problem with allowing the Almighty God to do as He sees fit with His own creation, and would not presume to question Him on it.
I say this not in arrogance as one saved by grace through faith (both of which are gifts bestowed on me by the Lord God), but as a small child who has had to learn to be thankful, and to know that God is righteous whether human eyes see Him so or not.

Peace be to us all
~ellie

superdave5221 · Jul 22, 2012

psychomom said:

Hello Psychomom,

No one questions God's authority to do whatever he wishes. However, some people have a false view of God's omnipotence. God's omnipotence means that he can do only those things that are consistent with his nature and reasonable. God cannot create a five sided triangle, for example. God cannot lie or break a promise. God cannot cease to exist.

God's laws are not arbritrary. He cannot decide one day to make a law that everyone is to hate everyone else. His laws are a reflection of his nature. His laws are good, because God is good.

We can argue this or that scripture all day long and get nowhere. However, God has revealed his nature to us in the Scriptures. We know him to be a God of righteousness. We, who are created in his image, have been endowed with the ability to understand that nature by observing his acts in history, studying his laws, and especially in his works of redemption by revealing himself fully in his son Jesus Christ.

Calvinists would have us [saved Christians] believe that we know nothing of God's nature even after it was revealed fully in Jesus Christ! And so we are to accept their views which contradict that nature because "we do not know an infinite God". Incredible!! God has made himself known to us!!

How is it consistent with what we know of God's nature to think that he would create men with the express purpose of sending them to hell? Hell was not even created for man, it was created for Satan and his angels, Mat. 25:41. The bible is clear that God does not wish for anyone to go there. Christ's atonement is sufficient for all men, but we must accept the free gift when is is made known to us and offered to us. Holy Spirit uses God's word found in the Scriptures to make God's redemption known to us. But we must enter into a relationship with Jesus Christ in order to receive that redemption. We who were dead in sin become alive in Christ!! However, a loving relationship can never be had unless both parties are free to give that love willingly.

How is it that Calvinists are comfortable with the idea that children who die before the age of accountability are still saved, but those who have reached that age and rejected God's salvation will be sent to hell? What then does the age of accountability represent? Is it not the age at which we can make a conscious decision based on free will?

Do you allow your dependent children to make decisions in their lives? Are you giving up your sovereignty by allowing them some autonomy? Would you micromanage their lives and make every decision for them and if so would they ever grow and mature into responsible adults? Would you be happy if their love for you resulted because they had no choice but to love you? Or would you rather that their love was a result of their own free will? How can we ever expect to understand God's love for us, if we cannot understand the love that exists within our own families?

How do we explain the process of sanctification? Why is it necessary for us to grow into spiritual maturity? If God is in control of every decision that we make, then after we are saved we should never sin again. And yet we do. All of us.

How would we ever be able to attain spiritual maturity if not allowed autonomous free will to make mistakes and learn from them?

psychomom · Jul 22, 2012

Yes, I didn't mean to imply I count myself a Calvinist, and surely (at least, as I see it), a case can be made from scripture for both sides of this argument, though I'm sure you saw I lean more toward what's termed the Calvinist viewpoint.
I actually had never even heard the term "Calvinist" until quite recently (at my age this could mean 5 years ago...lol), and I had to look it up!
At the churches we'd attended, we were always taught that man does play a part in the redemption experience, which I think is called Arminianism? Basically, Calvin v. Wesley, is that right? But labels were never attached to this doctrinal issue in church. I know there's a tulip involved (

) but other than the "elect" portion of what's called Calvinism, I really am not familiar with any of it. I've been taught the age of accountability varies and means being able to comprehend fully the work of the cross and one's own sin/need for redemption, to be brief about it.

At the bottom of it all is the fact that the Lord does indeed create people who will reject Him. Christ's sacrifice is certainly sufficient for any and all, and it doesn't seem inconsistent with God's character that He wishes no one to perish, surely. Yet not all are redeemed, unless one holds to the idea that no one rejects the Lord Jesus, but I am not of their number. I feel hell and what it means is another issue, and one which is currently being well discussed on these boards.

I agree with you that God has graciously made Himself known to us.

But I also agree with the statement that, while in these corruptible bodies, we cannot know an infinite God. Sorry- I must sound so annoying, and I don't wish to annoy you! It's just that I can see both sides of this disagreement. The Word is pretty clear that the Potter has a right to do what He wishes with His clay, and that I am no one to question Him. (one of the first books of scripture I knew well was Job, and I still get chills when I read the Lord's rebuke!) I realize you are not attempting to question God's authority, and I appreciate that about you.

I, personally, do allow my minor child some autonomy (for these next 5 months while I still have one, anyway). Your analogy reminds me of friends whose son, while we were visiting, asked his dad if he could do something involving a blowtorch and some piping. Dad said yes, son went to the basement, dad turned to us and said, "My son is about to learn that copper is an excellent conductor of heat." About a minute later we heard a yelp, and the clatter of a pipe hitting a cement floor. (don't worry, he wasn't injured. great story, yeah? and the boy most likely remembered it for the rest of his life!) And, of course the Lord gives us all the choice to make a bad choice, whether it be from ignorance or willful disobedience. I do maintain, though, that if I make a good choice, the credit is His. I suppose, like the story of our friends, most of our choices teach us important principles, though the lesson be one where we learn through pain. Or we will learn if we will be listening children, constantly looking to our Father. I do agree with you that the Lord doesn't control every decision we make, and that we do all sin after we have agreed with God that we need a Savior!

So...three things. Firstly, in my own opinion, the Lord does create those who (He knows, as He knows all things) ultimately reject His sacrifice. I don't know where you would file that, if you agree with it. I know it doesn't contradict that the Lord is loving and gracious, because the Word tells me He is.
Next, although I was always taught the 'free will" aspect of salvation, I am beginning to see the other side of that coin. And I wonder if they might not both be right, in a way. (by which I mean the Lord sees the end from the beginning)
And lastly, "We can argue this or that scripture all day long and get nowhere." You are so right!! Theologians have been debating this for...how long? But I liked reading what you said, and I appreciate the discussion! If there's more you'd like to say, I look forward to it, and will answer as best I can.

Wishing you well,
ellie
ps- I r-e-a-l-l-y like your user name! I always read it superdave, no pause, like superman. it makes me smile.

psychomom · Jul 23, 2012

psychomom said:

Just so we're on the same page...you know I was referring to the fact that before Christ bought me, there wasn't any good thing to be found in me, right?
Thanks
ellie

Abiding · Jul 23, 2012

tribesman said:

Its this kind of talk that keeps your message too far to reach. Many of us socalled heretics understand
that men cannot save themselves without being drawn, and empowered by grace.

Im close but still find no evidence that i was regenerated before i believed. Certainly it was God who drew me
and enlightenned me. But i made a choice that to you makes it look as if i added something to the cross, which
ive never seen the logic of. Nor does it appear to me as if ive gained any control, in fact the opposite.

Im still ok with most of whats said by calvinists, just dont agree on the order and mechanics of it...but im still
growing.

GraceBeUntoYou · Jul 26, 2012

superdave5221 said:

I was just stopping by to let you know that I have not forgotten about you, so should God be willing, I would definitely like to offer a response in the next day or so. I've been quite busy the past few days discussing the Deity of Christ on various forums, and working on a response to an article concerning the denial of prayer to Christ. So with that said...

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3FL6vNjd9Y[/video]

GraceBeUntoYou · Jul 29, 2012

superdave5221 said:

[FONT=&quot]I apologize for the delay in response, it's been rough trying to find time to actually respond to this. I was initially going to write a pretty lengthy response, but I don't think people actually ever read them, so, perhaps something a bit more up front and to the point.

There are several things that I think need to be dispelled up front. As Calvinists, we do not deny that men have a will, nor do we believe that men are mere puppets on a string which God causes to sin. Calvinism adheres that every part of man, including his will, mind, and emotions are corrupted by sin (John 3.19, John 8.34), and unless man is first drawn by the Father (John 6.65), and regenerated by the Spirit (1 John 5.1), then no man can come to Christ. While God proactively works in the hearts of those who are His, He passes over those who are not, leaving them wholly to their own self-determination in sin; thus, God is good, and men are responsible.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Scripture shows us that God decreed all things, and yet people are still held accountable for their actions (Romans 9.19):[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] (1) In Genesis 37 we read of Joseph being sold into slavery by his own brothers. After coming in contact with his brothers years later, Joseph says unto them, "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive[FONT=&quot]" [/FONT][FONT=&quot]([/FONT]Genesis 50.20).[FONT=&quot] Joseph's brothers meant evil by their actions, but God intended the same actions for good. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](2) In Isaiah 10.5-12, God uses Assyria as an instrument of judgment on the rebellious people of Israel, and then holds Assyria responsible for her sinful attitude and desires against Israel. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](3) In Acts 4.27-28, though Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles, and the Jews sought to do evil and harm to Christ by way of crucifixion, God meant good for the purpose of redemption -- one action with two intentions. [/FONT]

psychomom · Jul 29, 2012

Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.” What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. Romans 9:13-24

Ah, Romans 9...the continuation of Romans 8, which the OP quoted. To my mind, this is a much more stringent passage than 8:29,30 in support of the idea that there are certain ones who were predestined to inherit The Kingdom.
Yet, it is a difficult concept, perhaps most especially for Americans, or other westerners who have lived under freedom in national law, where we are all meant to be equal?
If one has loved ones for whom one prays, that they might be redeemed, it's an awe-full thought that they might not be destined to.
And for those of us who have had loved ones die unredeemed, it's downright terrifying.
This is what I meant by having had to learn that the Lord is righteously in control of all he has made, and no matter how any of us might see it, He is still good.
May we have peace in that knowledge.

~ellie

tribesman · Aug 11, 2012

Abiding said:

When you called out to God, when you "choose" to follow Jesus, you must already have been regenerated. Because such characteristics have no place whatsoever in the old, natural and unregenerate man. Unregenerate men are spiritually dead (Eph.2:1-3). A dead person cannot respond to the gospel any more than a blind person can respond to light (1Cor.2:14). Because unregenerate men are also spiritually blind (2Cor.4.4), What is good news to a dead man? As light cannot restore sight to a blind man, so the light of the gospel cannot give spiritual light to one who is spiritually blind.

So what would be "added" here, if taken to its worst consequence, would be a CONDITION that would be fulfilled IN YOU - NOT Christ alone. But that is not true. When God regenerates someone, He does not do that because of that person doing anything. No, He raises up a totally dead man and when this dead man has gotten life and understanding of whom has done this work, faith follows, together with much else as fruit.

I don't know if you have read it before (even if you have you might want to check it again) but in this post I deal not only with the lostness of the lost but also with the miracle of re-creation in the new birth.

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...pology-view-man-christ-paul-vs-pharisees.html <-link

Chart:

Red33 · Aug 11, 2012

When this publican prayed in the temple (Lk 18:13) and said 'Lord be merciful to me a sinner' regeneration had not taken place yet and it wouldn't until this man had received mercy from God (Titus 3:5,6). This man was not regenerated to receive mercy to be saved but was saved by mercy through the washing of regeneration. You certainly don't use election or predestination to justify regeneration before salvation or the justification of the sinner. It all happens all at once. God shines the light of the gospel on sinful man who is walking in darkness, He brings conviction in his heart through that light and the need for mercy to be forgiven of sin.

Sinful man, in his state of being dead in sins and trespasses, sees the light and responds in humility with positive volition by faith to that light and is instantly saved through the washing of regeneration according to God's mercy. That same man is justified by grace and made an heir according to the hope of eternal life (v.6). The publican, who humbled himself, went home justified and exalted by grace as an heir (Lk 18:14) and it all happened faster than a twinkling of an eye (11/100th of a second).

When we are drawn by the lovingkindness of God through the light of the cross and we believe upon the Son with our own volition, we are the only one who is saved, cleansed and forgiven of sin instantly. We can't do that for anyone else, so the salvation is applied to us and God gets the glory for Christ's sake. Are we to believe that Paul was already regenerated before he was struck by the light and before his conversion on the road to Damascus (Acts 9)? Just what kind of activity was Paul doing while having already been regenerated? How long is the sinner regenerated before he gets saved and converted?

Was Peter only regenerated during the time he walked with Christ because according to (Lk 22:32) he had not been converted yet. Is this why all the disciples had forsaken Him in (Mt 26:56) because they only had regeneration but not conversion or salvation yet? If that is true, how could the Lord when washing the disciples feet tell them that they are clean every whit (completely - Jn 13:10,11) but not all, referring to Judas? Are we cleansed after the washing of regenerated as a separate act of God or does it come before we are converted or justified. This kind of theology makes what God has done and made available to sinful man a confusing mess that we have to chase around to make sure we have done it right when we believed.

God has given free volition to all men, even when they are dead in their sins God has the power to stir them up with the light of life so they can respond to Him and believe by faith with their own volition (Jn 1:4, 8:12). This next verses describes the heart and justice of God toward all sinful men...

Jn 1:12,13

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Both verbs, believe and receive are in the active voice and refer to the subject (or to the many and them) as the ones who initiate the action of the verbs. You can't initiate the action of receiving or believing without having the volition involved, it's not possible. What God does in response to our receiving and believing is His initiation and His action and His response to our faith and that would be being born again through Him.

phil36 · Aug 11, 2012

Just to go back tot he original post....

Does foreknew mean that God only new mans actiosn.. as in man himself decided to be saved (what i call man's I Am syndrom) or does foreknew mean that God personally Knew you..He knew you as a person and not just your actions.

Foreknew etc is only used a handful of times in scripture and when refering to God means that he personally knew someone. Not looking down sometime tunnel and seeing the actions of someone.. but personally knew.

As for free will, well unless you are God you are not totally free therefore you do not have total freewill to do as you please.. But we do and can make choices, we do have a will that we can exert.. however, we wil only ever do what are nature dictates, your desires etc. Calvinism does not say that you dont have a will nor does it say you cannot not make real life choices. What it does say is that these are tied to your nature.

bradriegg · Sep 14, 2019

Sproul and Piper say for Calvinism to be true, regeneration must precede faith. Yet they offer zero biblical proof for this, while there is proof that faith precedes regeneration. Can anyone please give me some verses in support of regeneration preceding faith?

Nehemiah6 · Sep 14, 2019

tribesman said:

Except that Augustine did NOT teach the loss of free will as did Luther and the Calvinists. In fact he confirmed that the Bible itself proves that the free will of mankind was never taken away.

Written by St. Augustine of Hippo in A.D. 426 or 427

Extract from Augustine's Retractions (Book II, Chapter 66):

There are some persons who suppose that the freedom of the will is denied whenever God's grace is maintained, and who on their side defend their liberty of will so peremptorily as to deny the grace of God. This grace, as they assert, is bestowed according to our own merits. It is in consequence of their opinions that I wrote the book entitled On Grace and Free Will. This work I addressed to the monks of Adrumetum, in whose monastry first arose the controversy on that subject, and that in such a manner that some of them were obliged to consult me thereon. The work begins with these words: "With reference to those persons who so preach the liberty of the human will."

Chapter 2 [II.]— He Proves the Existence of Free Will in Man from the Precepts Addressed to Him by God.

Now He has revealed to us, through His Holy Scriptures, that there is in a man a free choice of will. But how He has revealed this I do not recount in human language, but in divine. There is, to begin with, the fact that God's precepts themselves would be of no use to a man unless he had free choice of will, so that by performing them he might obtain the promised rewards. For they are given that no one might be able to plead the excuse of ignorance...

Chapter 3.— Sinners are Convicted When Attempting to Excuse Themselves by Blaming God, Because They Have Free Will.

There are, however, persons who attempt to find excuse for themselves even from God. The Apostle James says to such: Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts He any man. But every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then, when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death. James 1:13-15 Solomon, too, in his book of Proverbs, has this answer for such as wish to find an excuse for themselves from God Himself: The folly of a man spoils his ways; but he blames God in his heart. Proverbs 19:3 And in the book of Ecclesiasticus we read: Say not, It is through the Lord that I fell away; for you ought not to do the things that He hates: nor say, He has caused me to err; for He has no need of the sinful man. The Lord hates all abomination, and they that fear God love it not. He Himself made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of His counsel. If you be willing, you shall keep His commandments, and perform true fidelity. He has set fire and water before you: stretch forth your hand unto whether you will. Before man is life and death, and whichsoever pleases him shall be given to him. Sirach 15:11-17 Observe how very plainly is set before our view the free choice of the human will.

Chapter 4.— The Divine Commands Which are Most Suited to the Will Itself Illustrate Its Freedom.

What is the import of the fact that in so many passages God requires all His commandments to be kept and fulfilled?... Now wherever it is said, Do not do this, and Do not do that, and wherever there is any requirement in the divine admonitions for the work of the will to do anything, or to refrain from doing anything, there is at once a sufficient proof of free will. No man, therefore, when he sins, can in his heart blame God for it, but every man must impute the fault to himself.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1510.htm

UnitedWithChrist · Sep 14, 2019

tribesman said:

Firstly, it is calvinism and calvinist, not calvanism and calvanist. OK?

Secondly, if you think Calvin and calvinism invented the view that man has no free will in justification, then you need to do a better study. It was taught of others long before him. St. Augustine is one example. Luther also had the same view.

Thirdly, you leave out the fact that sinners are dead in their trespasses and sins before they are regenerated (Eph.2:1-3) and that as such they are totally unable to positively respond to God's call.

Your view makes salvation conditioned on the work of the sinner, not the work of Christ alone.

Here some related threads:

On total depravity and inability:

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...pology-view-man-christ-paul-vs-pharisees.html <-link

Why the call to "choose life" and "choose ye this day whom ye will serve" are NOT universal calls:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/38300-deuteronomy-30-19-joshua-24-15-a.html <-link

Why the gospel call IS universal but does not imply universal ability to positively respond to it (against free-willism and antinomian hyper-calvinism)

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...lling-mark-1-14-15-repent-believe-gospel.html <-link

Why regeneration preceeds faith:

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...h-fruit-spirit-heresy-work-flesh-gal-5-a.html <-link

LOL...

It's hilarious how all these scholars on Christian chat can't even spell the theology they are criticizing

UnitedWithChrist · Sep 14, 2019

bradriegg said:

I suggest buying and reading the book The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended and Documented by David N. Steele.

https://smile.amazon.com/Five-Point...e+five+points&qid=1568500851&s=gateway&sr=8-1

However, here is one:

1 John 5:1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.

So, belief is a proof that one has been born of God. Therefore, being born of God must precede belief. Those who do not believe have not been born of God. Those who have been born of God believe.

Being born again brings along with it certain indicators, and belief is one of those.

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/Murphy01.html

You might also read this.

UnitedWithChrist · Sep 14, 2019

The understanding of Reformed individuals is that unbelievers have a heart of stone, and cannot respond until they receive a heart of flesh which wants to love and please God.

I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws (Ez 36:26-27).

Additionally, they realize that they can take NO CREDIT for themselves with regards to salvation, because they are utterly unable to bring themselves into a state where they are able to place their faith in Jesus. By nature, they are God-hating sinners and didn't have that sort of heart. God had to give them a heart that would respond to him.

By the way, Reformed theology isn't about proof-texting. It is a system which is coherent.

And, before anyone quotes John 3:16 to me, I totally believe that verse. The question is, what causes a person to believe? It is ridiculous to use John 3:16 as a proof text, because the real issue involves the cause of belief, not whether everyone who believes will be saved. We fully acknowledge that.

I wonder if someone has been listening to Leighton Flowers' videos. Seems like he's made a full-time job of criticizing Reformed theology.

If I were a synergist, I wouldn't be following his teachings. Even knowledgeable Arminians are suspicious of him because he is coming pretty close to Pelagianism. For example, Roger Olson, a well-known Arminian, wouldn't support some of Flowers' ideas for that reason.

UnitedWithChrist · Sep 14, 2019

In case you're having problems following this conversation between Leighton Flowers and Roger Olson, notice that Arminians believe in prevenient grace, because they are smart enough to know that the unsaved man, dead in sins, cannot respond on his own.

However, like James White mentioned, prevenient grace isn't taught in Scripture. That's why he called it "scotch tape" theology. In other words, Arminians admit that their theology has a hole in it, therefore they have "taped" their theology together with this doctrine. It is basically a "rescue device".

Here's a "got questions" article on it. I hold the Reformed (Calvinist) view.

https://www.gotquestions.org/prevenient-grace.html

Here's the quote from the article pertaining to Reformed theology:

Lastly, Calvinists refute the idea of prevenient grace with 1 John 5:1, which states that the cause of a person’s believing in Jesus Christ is that he was born again (i.e., regenerated), which John had already said is “not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13) and is necessary in order to perceive the kingdom of God (John 3:3). Calvinism emphasizes the natural man’s deadness in sin (Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13) and his need of a new heart (Ezekiel 11:19; 36:26), and concludes that man does not need to be made “better” or “partially alive”; rather, he needs to be resurrected!

Notice that Roger Olson dropped the conversation at the point where Leighton Flowers was moving off into his semi-Pelagian view.

TheDivineWatermark · Sep 14, 2019

I am neither Calvinist nor Arminianist…

I had a friend once say to me (who himself had just changed from Arminianism to embracing Calvinism) that "you are [/one can only be] either one OR the other!!" (I disagreed with him, of course, for I believe BOTH viewpoints are flawed)

bradriegg · Sep 14, 2019

UnitedWithChrist said:

I used to be a Calvinist, so I understand the 5 points quite well.
1 John 5:1 does not support regeneration before faith. Look at the context, and even the verse alone: "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well." In other words, belief precedes regeneration, as is shown in the verse: belief is first mentioned in the verse and precedes regeneration, which is named second.

Calvinists wrongly read into this verse to say instead, "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ [was previously] born of God [prior to believing], and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well."

If 1 Jn 5:1 was meant to say what Calvinists allege, the author could have and would have added the words above or, more simply, the word "then": "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is [then] born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well." But the author of 1 John did not do this.

So, this verse is actually neutral as to the question of order of salvation.

In fact, looking at the context of the verse, it is not about the order of salvation at all. It has nothing to do with the order of salvation. The purpose of 1 John, as the author tells us, is to identify false christs and seducers leading people astray with false doctrine. John is countering such false doctrine in 1 John. 1 Jn 2:26: "These things I have written to you concerning those who try to deceive you." - so we know that someone has deceived or seduced his audience. These deceivers are called antichrists in chapters 2 and 4.

John was speaking in part against Gnostics, who were antichrists, and believed some, select, elect few were given special, hidden knowledge, similar to how Calvinists use 1 Cor. 2:14 as if it is referencing a lost person not being able to grasp the Gospel without special help, they are espousing the Gnostic mode of esoteric information transfer. This contradicts 1 Jn 2:27: "But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him." Scripture is clear and plain, and any literate person can grasp the main ideas, without having to be told of a hidden (gnostic) meaning.

The first time I heard Calvinist doctrine, I thought it so strange and contrary to the plain reading of the text.

Many verses have already been cited above in the thread that say, for example, "he died for all" so I will not repeat them here. Yet Calvinists read into such verses to say, using this one example, "he died for all [of the elect]" when the verse says nothing of the sort. There is no hidden meaning to such verses that has to be unlocked by a certain system of thinking or enlightened person. The text means just what is says.

Indeed, distinctives (unique features) of Calvinism arose from Manichaean Gnosticism, via Augustine.

If you want to see more on this, check out:

More importantly, re-read 1 John, without putting what you read first through a TULIP lens.

Relatedly: "Calvinists, go to your young nieces and nephews or your sons or daughters and say this: "Jesus died for the elect, those whom he chose for salvation. He chose ME but it's possible he did not choose you and created you with the specific purpose of going to hell. If he did choose you, then great, you've won the spiritual lottery! If he did not choose you, then even better. You will spend an eternity in hell because God loves ME so much and picks favorites to be in heaven and condemns others in hell just to show how much mercy and love he has for ME." "

Romans 8:29-30 Refuting Calvanism - Free will

Senior Member

psychomom

Guest

Senior Member

psychomom

Guest

psychomom

Guest

Abiding

Guest

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest

psychomom

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

New member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member