Calvinism?

[Mjh29]

Oh please....you're adding in your ideas again. Did you realize that "ways" as in God's ways...are plural. You have it singular.

So then your ideas are like a one track mind with some derailed notions....but not God's.

Hebrews 13:8. As much as I would love to take credit for writing this, I believe that this came from the mouth of God. An secondly, while it is true that God has many ways, each way is unified in its purpose and goal and does not change. Let me ask you this; If God's standards constantly change, or are different for some than for others, then how can we guarantee that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient? If I have to have myself, but others are saved by God, then how can we say that Christ's sacrifice is constant?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Do I believe Calvin himself would like it if people labeled themselves after his name? Probably not. All glory goes to Christ. (But for the sake of the conversation going on and for people to know where I stand, yes that would be the label)

And you believe in a limited atonement?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Hi Nancy! I agree with you that this should not, in anyway, be a topic that causes division within the Church. But conversation should be held over it, as it seems to address important issues! I, like others here, wouldn't say I'm a "Calvinist", simply because that label has seemed to morph into something of it's own that is slightly misleading, but I would definitely say I'm not Arminian.
What I'd like to discuss first off, in regards to the article you linked to, is this paragraph:

"My main beef against Calvinism is the belief that God predestined certain people to be "elect"; in normal words, Calvinists believe that God dictated who will be saved before that person was even born. Now, that in itself is not so radical when you stop to consider how God sees time. But what is outragous is how Calvinists believe that man has no free will in the matter. I.e., man does not choose to follow God, God predestines man to follow God and be saved. So they believe that it's not: "Because you have faith in God and follow his ways, God will have mercy on you and save you." Instead, they believe it's: "Because God chose you, you will serve God and be saved." This paper will refute this notion."

In response to this, I would ask how he, or you, would react to this verse:

And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” - Romans 9:10–13

Here we have a clear verse that shows two things: that before Jacob and Esau were born God had made a selection of one of them, based not on works but on God's will alone, and that this is for God's purpose of election. In fact, it would seem that indeed, election is a tenet of grace...he chooses us before we have done a single thing, thought a single thought, so we might not look back and go "look! God picked me because I did....!" If we can lay claim to our own "election", let's say, then would that not be a grounds to boast? "I saw my need"..."I saw I was dead in my sins and needed God". I can't see the bible teaching this. Does it not tell us that "no one seeks God" and that our salvation rests entirely on Christ? I must believe when it says "entirely", and that I cannot boast, that it means just that.

It's that lack of free will that really turns me off from Calvinism.
Ok, better to say that it's one of several things that really turn me off.

 

[Mjh29]

And you believe in a limited atonement?

If people would just stop to consider that Limited is only used because it fits the acrostic tuLip, maybe we could get somewhere. People read limited, and instantly assume that they are experts in exactly what is is the Synod believed. Limited means Definite or particular. Jesus Christ indeed saved us that day on the cross; he didnt just make us saveable.

 

[Mjh29]

It's that lack of free will that really turns me off from Calvinism.
Ok, better to say that it's one of several things that really turn me off.

What is your definition of free will? Because what you describe is impossible.

 

[Episkopos]

Hebrews 13:8. As much as I would love to take credit for writing this, I believe that this came from the mouth of God. An secondly, while it is true that God has many ways, each way is unified in its purpose and goal and does not change. Let me ask you this; If God's standards constantly change, or are different for some than for others, then how can we guarantee that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient? If I have to have myself, but others are saved by God, then how can we say that Christ's sacrifice is constant?

You are the one making the errant link between ways....and purpose.

 

[Mjh29]

You are the one making the errant link between ways....and purpose.

What errors? Please explain.
Also, if you could, please answer my previous question.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

But what is outragous is how Calvinists believe that man has no free will in the matter. @Naomi25

This statement here shows that you are misunderstanding the concept. Man has a will, a free agency, we can make choices and think, etc, we are not free in the fact that we are "slaves of sin". the nature of man is fallen and enslaved to sin and in this corrupt state humans can't / won't submit to God. The will / nature of man is not "free" if it is a slave to sin. In fact, it's crazy to believe that someone takes credit for coming to God all on their own ability when they never would have unless He convicted them first. So in reality it was never your own free choice alone.

Personally I've seen people try to polarize man's role in salvation as either being a strict A or B
A) A person only comes to Christ because God forces them to, or
B) Else if a man has free will, that mean's man is taking credit for God's work.

Personally I find this to be a false dichotomy. Salvation is a gift-- a gift God offers to all mankind. Each person simply chooses to accept or reject this gift (after all "gifts" by definition are something you have that choice about). If Bob accepts a gift from Jesus does that mean Bob gets credit for creating that gift? No, of course!!! Jesus made the gift- all credit goes to Him.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

What is your definition of free will? Because what you describe is impossible.

See post 88.

 

[Mjh29]

Salvation is a gift-- a gift God offers to all mankind. Each person simply chooses to accept or reject this gift (after all "gifts" by definition are something you have that choice about). If Bob accepts a gift from Jesus does that mean Bob gets credit for creating that gift? No, of course!!! Jesus made the gift- all credit goes to Him.

1.) If Christ's Sacrifice was for all men, then why are all men not saved? If our wills are free, and not at all swayed by our natures, then why are all men not saved? Did Christ fail in His work of redemption
2.) If Bob accepts a gift that others reject, that puts Bob in a position of superiority; Bob was much smarter than Jonny or Sue. But the real question then is this; Why dont all free willed people see how gracious of a gift it is and take it? It is apparently a free ticket to heaven, and since we are all free and are not at all swayed by anything in our nature, why dont all men choose correctly? What stops some from choosing the blatantly correct choice?

 

[Episkopos]

You are the one making the errant link between ways....and purpose.

What errors? Please explain.
Also, if you could, please answer my previous question.

You are not realizing that my statement makes your question moot. You have to learn to ask the right questions. Truth doesn't work by trying to fit it into a box you have mistakenly label as "truth."

 

[Mjh29]

You are not realizing that my statement makes your question moot. You have to learn to ask the right questions. Truth doesn't work by trying to fit it into a box you have mistakenly label as "truth."

And it also doesnt work by saying we have a God who changes His mind like a girl changes clothes. But please, do answer the previous question anyways, Im curious to see your thoughts.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

1.) If Christ's Sacrifice was for all men, then why are all men not saved?

Because each person has the choice to accept or reject Christ's gift. Some choose accept, some to reject.

Did Christ fail in His work of redemption

Of course not. He offers a perfect gift to all.

2.) If Bob accepts a gift that others reject, that puts Bob in a position of superiority; Bob was much smarter than Jonny or Sue.

Nonsense.

But the real question then is this; Why dont all free willed people see how gracious of a gift it is and take it? It is apparently a free ticket to heaven, and since we are all free and are not at all swayed by anything in our nature, why dont all men choose correctly? What stops some from choosing the blatantly correct choice?

Because some people choose to love Satan more than Christ. They would rather be a temporary king of this world, rather than be subjects to the True King of eternity.

 

[Episkopos]

And it also doesnt work by saying we have a God who changes His mind like a girl changes clothes. But please, do answer the previous question anyways, Im curious to see your thoughts.

Try asking the question then (I don't know which question anymore)'

God indeed changes His mind...but never His ways. And the goal is always the same. A people who resemble Christ in love, humility, honour, and grace.

 

[Mjh29]

Because each person has the choice to accept or reject Christ's gift. Some choose accept, some to reject.

Of course not. He offers a perfect gift to all.

Nonsense.

Because some people choose to love Satan more than Christ. They would rather be a temporary king of this world, rather than be subjects to the True King of eternity.

So, Christ died, but his blood is ineffective so long as I choose to make it so. I have more power in my own salvation than the blood of Christ.

 

[Mjh29]

Try asking the question then (I don't know which question anymore)'

God indeed changes His mind...but never His ways. And the goal is always the same. A people who resemble Christ in love, humility, honour, and grace.

So... If God never changes any of His ways, This means that we are either chosen or we do the choosing.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

So, Christ died, but his blood is ineffective so long as I choose to make it so. I have more power in my own salvation than the blood of Christ.

Does a child have more power than a parent because they can choose to reject the parent's gift?
No! Of course not.

 

[Episkopos]

So... If God never changes any of His ways, This means that we are either chosen or we do the choosing.

We do both...we are chosen in order to choose....and we choose in order to be chosen'

It takes 2 to tango, as they say.

God is looking for fellowship with us. He isn't just a sovereign God and distant. He is near to us so we can go to Him...and He to us.

Draw near to Me and I will draw near to you. (This is NOT a Calvinist idea)

 

[Mjh29]

Does a child have more power than a parent because they can choose to reject the parent's gift?
No! Of course not.

But if we dont accept the gift, how can we be saved?

 

[Mjh29]

We do both...we are chosen in order to choose....and we choose in order to be chosen'

It takes 2 to tango, as they say.

God is looking for fellowship with us. He isn't just a sovereign God and distant. He is near to us so we can go to Him...and He to us.

Draw near to Me and I will draw near to you. (This is NOT a Calvinist idea)

So... God looks into the future and sees that we will believe, and that is why He chooses us?