Original post by Ronnie W. Rogers
I agree with the Calvinist claim that the gospel is simple and clear, but I contend that Calvinism, by its very nature, complicates and obscures the simple and clear gospel.[1] Yes, someone can be saved when anyone says something like, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,” but the difference between what a Calvinist and Extensivist (non-Calvinist) mean when uttering those words is quite different.[2] Just the cache of extra-biblical concepts needed to characterize Calvinism as a biblical position is telling.
Their view requires concepts such as two wills (revealed and secret), two calls (external to all and internal to the elect only), two loves (salvifically speaking rather than different kinds such as love of a child or spouse), two levels of atonement (sufficient for the non-elect but efficient for the elect only), two parallel lines (to give an appearance of reconciling unconditional election, micro-determinism, and God’s salvific love for all with man’s freedom), two gospel offers (good faith offer which is not an actual offer as opposed to the Bible’s good offer of the gospel), compatibilism (but regularly speak libertarianly),[3] mystery (gloss of Calvinistically-generated contradictions), and using the distinction between man’s intellect and moral aspects to obfuscate the plight of the non-elect (i.e., the person cannot choose to believe).[4] In Calvinism, Scripture is not simple with depth but cryptic, with these concepts only accessible to Calvinism’s theological sophisticates.
For example, in Scripture, we see Jesus making good offers to repent and be saved (Matt 4:17; 11:20-21; Luke 5:32; 15:7; 24:47). Some Calvinists say Jesus was making a “good faith offer” (if there is such an idea) since, as a man, he did not know who the elect were. There is an insurmountable problem with imposing an unawareness of who the non-elect are upon Christ to sustain the idea that rather than presenting a good offer, he only presented a “good faith offer.”
Because Jesus said he always did the will of the Father (John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38; 17:4) and spoke not of his own initiative but what the Father wanted him to speak (John 3:11, 34; 5:19; 7:16; 8:26, 28, 38; 12:49-50; 14:10, 24, 31; 17:8). Furthermore, the Holy Spirit was upon Jesus and filling him without measure (Isa 61:1; Matt 12:18; Luke 3:22; 4:1, 14; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Consequently, even if Jesus did not know, the Father and the Holy Spirit knew; therefore, the Calvinist doctrine of selective regeneration makes the Trinity complicitous in this unscrupulous misrepresentation. The obvious truth is that Jesus commanded them to repent because he was not willing that any would perish and desired that all would come to repentance (2 Pet 3:9), something God has grace enabled everyone who hears the truth to be able to do.
Calvinist Kevin DeYoung asks, “Is God wise enough to make himself known? Is he good enough to make himself accessible? Is he gracious enough to communicate in ways that are understandable to the meek and lowly? Or does God give us commands we can’t understand and a self-revelation that reveals more questions than answers?”[5] My answer is yes; he is wise enough, good enough, and gracious enough, but I do not think Calvinists can consistently say yes in the same sense because Calvinism burdens God with withholding, for most, what is necessary to know him and make him accessible. And if Calvinism is true, God has surely not communicated in ways understandable to the meek, lowly, or the hoi polloi but only to the enlightened theological sophisticates.
The truth is, while God made Scripture to be exoteric (to be understood by the average person), Calvinism makes Scripture esoteric (truly understood by a chosen few). This is in spite of the fact that Calvinists still proclaim the perspicuity (clarity) of Scripture.[6]
[1] For example, Calvinist Kevin DeYoung states, “The saving message of Jesus Christ is plainly taught in the Scriptures and can be understood by all who have ears to hear it. We don’t need an official magisterium to tell us what the Bible means.” In his book Taking God at His Word (Wheaton: Crossway, 2014), 45.
[2] See my book Does God Love All or Some? Particularly chapters 20, 21, and 25.
[3] COMPATIBILISM: Determinism and moral responsibility are compatible, hence the name. This compatibility is not achieved by compatibilism being less deterministic than hard determinism. Rather, it is achieved by defining free choice to mean as long as a person chooses according to his greatest desire, he has made a free choice for which he is morally responsible; even though given the same past, he cannot choose differently in the moral moment of decision.
Consequently, the difference between compatibilism (soft determinism) and hard determinism is not to be found in the levels of the deterministic nature of each since they are the same. Rather, the difference is compatibilism simply contends people are morally responsible for their choices if they are made according to their greatest desire, and hard determinism says they are not. Therefore, moral responsibility is the product of defining free choice as a person acting in accordance with his greatest desire even though the desire is determined.
LIBERTARIAN: Man is not determined. He has the actual ability to choose between accessible options, at least in some scenarios. Libertarians contend determinism is not compatible with moral responsibility. Man possesses actual otherwise choice and can, therefore, act or refrain in the moral moment of decision, given the same past within a given range of options.
Extensivism argues God endowed man with this ability, which is an aspect of being created in the image of God. God determines the range of options. Adam’s range of options, the result of creative grace, was greater than mankind’s options after the fall. Fallen man can still choose between options, but the range of options is less than man had prior to the fall. This lessening includes losing the ability to make choices that are inherently righteous or spiritually restorative (making one right with God) based solely on creative grace. In order to make an inherently righteous choice or one that is spiritually restorative, God had to provision redemptive grace—grace enablements—which he did.
[4] Add to these Calvinism’s uniquely narrow definitions such as sovereignty being causal and only exercisable over determined or compatibly free beings, or the necessary adjectives in the TULIP.
[5] Kevin DeYoung, Taking God at His Word (Wheaton: Crossway, 2014), 69.
[6] DeYoung comments, “The doctrine of the clarity of Scripture is not a wild assertion that the meaning of every verse in the Bible will be patently obvious to everyone. Rather, the perspicuity of Scripture upholds the notion that ordinary people using ordinary means can accurately understand enough of what must be known, believed, and observed for them to be faithful Christians.” Kevin DeYoung, Taking God at His Word (Wheaton: Crossway, 2014), 59. I think the Calvinist system fails here as well.
br.d patheos.com has an article headlined
“The Bible is Not Obvious and Clear”
SEPTEMBER 6, 2019 BY FELLOW DYING INMATE
About the Countless Different Interpretations of the Bible
br.d , Another good article from
patheos.com is headlined
“3 Lenses With Which to View the So-Called ‘Clear Biblical Truths’ ” on
NOVEMBER 14, 2017 BY MATTHEW DISTEFANO
Which Lense is Most correct ?
Have a Great weekend everybody
br.d
Good morning Jeff!
.
Yes – I agree with much of the wisdom in this article.
Many years ago – when I was a young fellow – I was dating a certain girl in the church I was attending.
Her family was very unhappy with her – because they were staunch Catholic and for them – her coming to the Lord – meant her leaving the Catholic church – which in their minds was the only *TRUE* form of Christianity.
.
In particular – I remember my first conversation with her mother who very quickly brought up the subject.
Her mother started trying to insist the Catholicism was the *TRUE* form of Christianity.
And I was bold enough to relate the elements of paganism which were inherent within Catholicism.
.
All of the facts I provided to her mother were historically correct.
But since those facts did not line up her biased opinion – she could not accept them.
.
Her statement was “You can disagree with me if you want to – but if you do – you are simply wrong”
.
She AUTO-MATIGALLY raised her belief system up onto a *DIVINE* pedestal
And her *DIVINE* pedestal allowed her to look DOWN at everyone else.
.
I would later identify this practice as *SELF CANONIZATION* and I would discover the same exact process with Calvinists.
.
There is a Youtube video created by “Premier Unbelievable?” which is titled: “William Lane Craig vs James White”
.
This topic comes up in that discussion between those two men.
.
Dr. Craig points out that *ALL* humans are subject to what scripture calls “The Bondage of Corruption”.
And that the scripture is divine – but we human beings who read scripture – do not have divine minds.
And our *INTERPRETATION* of scripture is very much subject to human biases.
.
James White’s claim is that the human biases which Dr. Craig refers to exist for Bible readers who are NOT Calvinists.
But the Calvinist reading of scripture is *INSPIRED* by the Holy Spirit.
.
What James is doing – is the exact same thing this Catholic mother was doing many years ago.
.
Calvinists are pretty much taught that the Calvinist reading of scripture is *DIVINE*
.
I happens all the time – I get in a conversation with a Calvinist and they will tell me – my reasoning is “HUMAN” reasoning while their reasoning is *DIVINE* reasoning.
.
That of course – is a full-blown denial of “The Bondage of Corruption” which scripture itself describes.
.
Additionally – the Calvinist is once again – in complete denial of his own belief system.
Part of the Calvinist belief system – is “TOTAL DEPRAVITY”
.
But the Calvinist does not consider himself “TOTALLY DEPRAVED”
Everyone who is NOT a Calvinist reads scripture with some degree of depravity.
But the Calvinist’s reading of scripture is *DIVINE*
.
What the Calvinist does – is *CANONIZE* himself.
.
So the Calvinist has two Canons
1) He has the CANON of scripture
2) He has the CANON of his interpretation
.
This process is of *SELF-CANONIZATION* is essentially the practice of raising a tradition of interpretation up onto a pedestal – and making it *DIVINE*
.
The Calvinist is actually calling himself *DIVINE*
But of course – he cannot be honest enough with himself – to acknowledge it.
.
Blessings!
And have a great week-end Jeff!
br.d :-]
Thank for your comments BR. I’ve certainly experienced the Calvinist believing himself to be right but have not had one come right out and say his interpretation was “divine.” The hubris and pride in that is unbelievable. I think my immediate reaction would be to just laugh in their face. Of course the other way to approach would be to say that in Calvinism, it’s obviously God’s sovereign will that I interpret scripture differently than them so in that sense any interpretation is “divine” because God caused my to interpret it that way!
br.d
Yes Andy!
.
And of course – the Calvinist knows your reaction would be to laugh.
And that would be the opposite of what he wants.
He wants you to take him seriously.
.
We can generally see – there are two kinds of statements.
There are statements which are made within EXPLICIT language
And there are statements which are couched within INFERENTIAL language.
.
All adults realize there is a certain degree of risk in the use of EXPLICIT language.
Politicians for example – are experts at evading EXPLICIT language and couching statements within INFERENTIAL language.
.
So Calvinists will use words which have LIBERTARIAN inferences – such as the word “Choice” for example.
It would not be unusual for a Calvinist to claim that within his belief system – people are held accountable for the “Choices” they make.
.
But do people have “Choice” in Calvinism?
If it is infallibly decreed that you will turn left at TIME-T – then the option for you to NOT turn left at TIME-T does not exist for you – because that option was infallibly excluded at the foundation of the world.
The option for you to turn left at TIME-T is not granted existence within creation because it would falsify the decree.
.
Consequently – you did NOT have a “Choice” between turning left and NOT turning left – because the option to NOT turn left – did not exist for you.
.
So Calvinists will use the language of “Choice” to create a FALSE PICTURE of ALTERNATIVES available for people to choose.
.
But the doctrine stipulates – an infallible decree does not grant the existence of ALTERNATIVES from that which it decrees.
.
Good points!
Blessings!
br.d :-]
Hi Andy,
You said: I’ve certainly experienced the Calvinist believing himself to be right but have not had one come right out and say his interpretation was “divine.”
They may not say “divine” but they do say “biblical.” And “God-centered.” And that Calvinism IS the gospel.
Essentially, they are calling their theology “divine” without using that word. And they make you feel like disagreeing with them is disagreeing with God and His Truth.
And yeah, it’s funny to me that they fight people who disagree with Calvinism when, clearly, our views against Calvinism were “ordained” by Calvi-god for his glory and good pleasure. Our anti-Calvinist stance is just as predestined/caused by God and just as glorifying to God as their Calvinist stance. And yet they fight us and act like we’re wrong, like we’re dishonoring God somehow. Ironic and hypocritical.
Blessings to you, Andy! 🙂
Thanks Heather. Now that I think of it you are right, there are plenty of times I’ve heard them say “biblical” and “God-centered” inferring that their interpretation is the biblical and God-centered one and any other is not, which is the same thing just using different words. The Calvinist church I used to attend, when they build their new sanctuary building, put two huge signs in the entry lobby that said “High View of God” and “High View of Scripture”. After I left I thought about those signs, and thought about the hubris of them. The inference of course is that their church is identified by this and most other churches don’t have a high view of God and of scripture like they do, If that’s not the inference and it’s not a particular distinctive of that church but not others, what’s the point of the signs?
Andy,
“High View of God” and “High View of Scripture”… That’s the exact phrases I was thinking of too. I’ve seen this a lot with Calvinists.
And it’s funny because, in my mind, the more someone has to say something, the less true it often is – such as the person who can be trusted the least is often the one constantly claiming “I’m honest. I don’t lie. You can trust me. I can keep secrets, etc.”
But the truly honest, trustworthy person shows it by their life and earns trust over time, so they don’t have to keep making these claims, trying to convince people it’s true.
I wonder if the Calvinist’s constant claims of “we have a high view of God/Scripture” are almost to comfort themselves because they sense something is wrong, deep down. And of course, it’s to get naive people to let their guards down and turn off their spiritual radars and to just trust what’s being taught.
After all, the Calvinist pastor said he’s “preaching right from Scripture and has a high view of God and the Bible,” so he can’t be wrong, can he? 😉
Brother, please find a link below to a true defence of Calvinism. Heart stirring message.
[link removed]
br.d
Hello James and welcome
.
Due to policy concerning inappropriate content – SOT101 does not allow links to other sites as content within posts.
.
But you are more than free to provide a summary of the points you feel are critical.
.
I do however have a comment concerning you automatically calling other believers “Brothers”
If you *TRULY* understand Calvinist doctrine – then you know what the doctrine stipulates.
.
The doctrine stipulates 2 very critical things
1) In Calvinism – a large percentage of believers are specifically created as CHAFF believers.
These believers are divinely deceived – having been given a FALSE SENSE of salvation.
John Calvin explains:
-quote
The Lord….instills into their minds such *A SENSE* ..as can be felt *WITHOUT* the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
-quote
He illumines *ONLY FOR A TIME* to partake of it; then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
2) The doctrine does not grant the Calvinist any CERTAINTY of election
.
John Calvin
-quote
But because a *SMALL* and contemptible number are hidden in a *HUGE* multitude and a *FEW GRAINS* of wheat
are covered by a *PILE OF CHAFF*, we must leave to god alone the knowledge of his church, whose foundation
is his ***SECRET*** election. (Institutes 4.1.4)
.
-quote
We must thus consider both God’s SECRET election and his INNER call. For he alone “knows who are his” (Institutes. 4. 1. 2.)
.
Consequently – per the doctrine – a Calvinist has no way of knowing if he himself is a TRUE brother.
And he certainly has no way of knowing if any other person is a TRUE brother.
.
So as a Calvinist – you are not being TRUE to your doctrine to assume anyone is a TRUE brother.
.
blessings
br.d
br.d
James – the video you linked to – does not present an accurate representation of Calvinism.
.
Firstly- the presenter calls John Calvin -quote “A good man”
.
Apparently this presenter is not familiar with Jesus correcting a person who called him ‘Good”
Jesus’ expressly stated: “There is no one who is good except God”.
.
If this presenter was familiar with the words of Jesus – he would know not to put any man on a pedestal or to worship any man – or to heroize any man.
.
I’m sorry to inform you – what you are getting here is simply a *WHITE-WASHED* picture of Calvinism.
.
Calvinism is a doctrine of divine malevolence – trying to masquerade itself as a doctrine of divine benevolanece.
.
Calvin’s god has two provisions for mankind.
1) His PRIMARY provision is for THE MANY – creating them specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
2) his SECONDARY provision is to save a FEW from his PRIMARY provision.
.
Calvin’s god creates babies, and women, and men, specifically for a lake of fire – for his good pleasure
.
John Calvin explains
-quote
By the eternal *GOOD PLEASURE* of god – though the reason does not appear – they are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of
destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
Anyone who tries to call the act of creating babies, women, and men specifically for eternal torment for one’s pleasure an act of “Grace” is telling you lies.
.
Calvinism is not a doctrine of “Grace”
Calvinism is s doctrine of “Good-Evil”
.
Blessings!
br.d
The question should be “Does Man have the Ability to Respond to the Gospel while in a Fallen State” Calvinists say no. Because of the false doctrine of Total Depravity Calvinist say, man certainly cannot respond to God or the Gospel in a fallen condition. This is not scriptural and here is why – Consider these examples:
The Prodigal Son – Luke 15:13-24 “He wasted his substance with riotous living” He was not saved, because in verse :24 it says “For this my son was Dead and is alive again, he was lost and is found” He was dead, not physically dead but spiritually dead or separated from the Father. The question is was God talking to his heart while he was in the pigpen of life? The bible says in verse :17 that “He came to himself”. Verse :21 say’s “Father I have sinned against Heaven and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son” So the Prodigal son backslid, ended up in the pigpen of sin, started thinking about going back to his fathers house, “made the right choice while he was in a fallen state” and came back to the father and got saved.
How about the Roman jailer. This man was a Roman, probably an idol worshipper. This man was in a fallen state he was an unsaved Roman soldier. So the question is if this Roman was totally depraved and if it’s true that it was impossible for him to respond to the Gospel or to God in a fallen state, then how could he ask God and Paul in verse 30: “What must I do to be saved” Checkout Acts 16:27-31.
Or Apostle Paul (Saul) on the road to Damascus. Paul (Saul) was a killer Acts 7:60, 8:1, Acts 9:1
How could someone as depraved as Paul respond to Jesus if it was impossible for him to respond to the gospel as Calvinists say. Read Acts 9:11 where Paul prayed, verse 15: Jesus says that Paul is a chosen vessel unto me. Verse 18, received his sight and was filled with the Holy Ghost. Again this proves that the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity is false.
Hello Robert and welcome
.
Robert
The question should be “Does Man have the Ability to Respond to the Gospel while in a Fallen State” Calvinists say no.
.
br.d
The Calvinist appeal to Total Depravity – is designed to function as a lie of omission.
A lie of omission is communication designed to mislead – by the strategy of omitting critical facts – which if not omitted would not mislead.
.
The critical fact strategically omitted in this case – is that the doctrine stipulates – the state of nature (including every man’s nature) at every nano-second in time – is 100% meticulously predestined – and at any instance in time cannot possibly be OTHER than what it was decreed to infallibly be – and man is granted NO SAY in the matter.
.
Calvinists use the “T” in the TULIP to FALSELY attribute man’s abilities/inabilities and thus his eternal destiny – to the state of his nature.
When the TRUTH is – the state of man’s nature – at every nano-second in time – as well as his eternal destiny – are both *FIXED* by infallible decree before man is created – and man is granted NO SAY and NO CHOICE in the matter.
.
In Calvinism – the vast majority of the total human population (THE MANY) are created specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
John Calvin
-quote
by the eternal *GOOD PLEASURE* of god though the reason does not appear, they are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
So creating people for eternal torment is Calvin’s god’s PRIMARY provision for mankind
.
His SECONDARY provision for mankind – is to save (A FEW) from his PRIMARY provision.
.
Calvinists realize – if they TELL THE TRUTH – about what their doctrine stipulates – people will reject it.
So they use the “T” in the TULIP to evade TELLING THE TRUTH – and to paint a FALSE PICTURE of human AUTONOMY which does not exist in their system.
.
.
I liked the examples you gave!
But of course – the Calvinist is going to have a TAP-DANCE routine – designed to talk around every possible example.
.
So you will often find – trying to deliberate with a Calvinist over these issues – is like talking to a broken record.
.
Blessings!
And Happy Holidays!!!
.
br.d
My question requires a yes or no
answer. If no, then consider those scriptures that were presented. Doctrines of men or slimy “frogs” if you will, won’t work on judgement day.
It looked like my comment was removed, just wondering.
br.d
Hi Robert.
.
There is an Non-Calvinist answer – and also a Calvinist answer to that question
.
For the NON-Calvinist – the answer is yes as follows:
1) ALTERNATIVES and CONTRARY OPTIONS exist within creation
For example
OPTION_A: Believe upon Jesus Christ
OPTION_B: NOT believe upon Jesus Christ
Those two options are CONTRARY to each other.
.
2) Humans are granted CHOICE between CONTRARY options
3) That CHOICE is left *UP TO* the person
.
Additionally – whatever *PROVISION* a person may need in order to be able to make that choice – is provided.
And that is what is meant by “Provisionism”
.
On Calvinism – things are radically different
1) For every human event – and every human impulse – an infallible decree never grants more than *ONE SINGLE PREDESTINED RENDERED-CERTAIN OPTION*
.
2) The creature is granted NO SAY in the matter of what that option will be
3) The creature is granted no ability to refrain.
.
If it is decreed that you WILL believe – then that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE option
Since NO ALTERNATIVE option exists for you – it follows – you are not granted a CHOICE in the matter
.
If it is decreed that you WILL NOT believe – then once again – that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE option.
And once again – since NO ALTERNATIVE option exists for you – it follows – you are not granted a CHOICE in the matter
.
Simply put – in Calvinism – humans are granted NO SAY, NO CHOICE, and NO CONTROL over any impulse that will come to pass within their brains.
.
There is no such thing as mental AUTONOMY granted to humans in Calvinism
In Calvinism – you cannot have an impulse in your brain you can call your own.
.
Calvinist Robert R. McLaughlin
-quote
“God merely *PROGRAMMED* into the divine decrees all our thoughts, motives and actions”(The Doctrine of Divine Decree pg 4)
.
Calvinist Paul Helms
-quote
Not only is every atom and molecule, every thought and desire, kept in being by god, but *EVERY TWIST AND TURN* of each of these is under the *DIRECT CONTROL* of god (The Providence of God pg 22)
.
Calvinist Louis Berkhof
-quote
God is immediately operative in every act of the creature. Everything that happens from moment to moment is determined by the will of god – and in every instance the *IMPULSE TO ACTION* precedes from god (Systematic Theology)
.
blessings!
br.d
Robert,
If you are looking for a yes, or a no to your questions, it will be based on which denominiation that you ask it to. It’s not as simple as it sounds, because BOTH of your TRADITIONAL non-Calvinists will answer the same as Calvinists, because both sides seem to believe in a NASTY doctrine called “original sin”, which would REQUIRE a NASTY doctrine of GRACE, prior to being given NASTY doctrine they call “SAVING FAITH”.
To the Calvinists, it’s called “IRRESISTABLE” GRACE.
To the opposing side, it’s called “PREVENIENT” GRACE.
Then, OUTSIDE OF THAT, you have those, like me, who thinks that Original Sin is a FALSE DOCTRINE, which makes both sides of the DOCTRINES of Grace to be BOGUS arguments.
In short, I do not believe in SAVING FAITH, or IRRESISTABLE GRACE, or PREVENIENT GRACE, or ORIGINAL SIN.
But, and this is important…both sides also believe in a “for there is no difference between Jew and Gentile”.
But they forget the “IN CHRIST” part, meaning that both Jew and Gentile needs to be Christian first, before there is no Jew/Gentile.
But, both sides definately want you to know that there is indeed MALE/FEMALE whether in Christ or not, even though scripture states for there is no difference between male and female. They want to correct Paul on that one, but not of the other!
So, in short, I believe that there is a HUGE difference between Jew and Gentile…one of which begins with Deu 29:4, as opposed to Romans 15:21. Why did Jews kill Jesus? Weren’t they supposed to? Peter tried to defend the idea against it, but Jesus called Peter Satan, because he was thinking in human terms, rather than spiritual terms.
Anyway, just a reason why you can’t really get a yes/no answer to your questions, because even though Paul did NOT seek out Jesus, Jesus did seek out Paul, and that, to the both sides, would mean that God INTERVENED to save Paul!
But, in my conclusion, that’s exactly what God did, he intervened to save Paul. But not because Paul was DEAD IN SINS as a human, but because he was a BLIND JEW.
Consider Deu 29:4 again, contrasted with Romans 15:21. Now put John 9:39-41 to the equation for the blind Jews! Now take a NEW FRESH look at Romans 11, which discusses blind Jews, and God’s plan to remove their blinders!
Then look at the word MERCY, and then go back and RE-REVIEW Romans 9 once again, remembering the REASON that Jews HAD TO KILL Jesus, and HOW that was going to be accomplished.
Again, keeping in mind Romans 15:21.
So, the answers that you get from me, would differ from those who believe in original sin. David had ZERO SIN in the womb of his mother. He was CONCEIVED in iniquity, but that does not mean that David was sinning in the womb. What did David steal? What did David covet? Could David commit adultery in the womb? They can’t even identifiy a sin that could be done in the womb. But they want you to believe that David carried the sin guilt of Adam? LOL.
There is no such thing as Original Sin, and I don’t care how much Romans 5 is referenced.
Ed Chapman
Robert,
A couple more things to mention:
1. The prodigal son
The son was WITH THE FATHER before demanding his inheritance to depart his father.
This, in spiritual terms, means that he was SPIRITUALLY ALIVE before dying a spiritual death so that he could go whoring in town to sow his wild oats. In other words, he wasn’t BORN DEAD as the Calvinists would contend, all because he was already with THE FATHER before he left…on his own. He also came back ON HIS OWN, without the promt of anyone, or anything, except that he was broke and destitute.
2. The Roman Jailor, the idol worshiper…
Idols are nothing, they can’t breathe, talk, smell, taste, walk, etc. They are made with man’s hands cut out of wood, and overlayed with silver and gold. The golden calf couldn’t even drivel snot are saliva.
Psalms 115:4–8
4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands.
5 They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not:
6 They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not:
7 They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat.
8 They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them.
No, the following is NOT a Christmas Tree, but it is a STATUE:
Jeremiah 10:3–5
3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
NOTE VERSE 5: THEY CAN’T DO EVIL, OR GOOD. WHY? Here’s a hint: Ba’al doesn’t exist. He’s not real.
1 Corinthians 8:4
As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
Concerning the Mars Hill Idol Worshipers:
Acts 17:30
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
What is “winked”? What is “ignorance”?
But notice who got into trouble. It wasn’t the Gentiles! It was the Jews! Hence, a huge difference between Jew/Gentile, wouldn’t you say?
Jews under the law, vs. Gentiles not under the law. So why the Law for the Jews?
Romans 5:20
The law was given SO THAT sin would INCREASE!
Ed Chapman
br.d, Heather, and Everyone Else
I just found this article from the Los Angeles times website
latimes.com headlined
“Stanford scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don’t have free will”
BY CORINNE PURTILL STAFF WRITER
OCT. 17, 2023 , so could it be that we Humans are living in a Giant Computer simulation like the 1999 Film “The Matrix” What is Reality ?
Could the Scientist be right ?
br.d.
Hello Jeff – here is something for you to think about.
.
Is your brain – granted the ability to choose between TRUE and FALSE on any matter?
If someone asks you a TRUE/FALSE question – does your brain have the ability to choose between TRUE and FALSE on that question?
.
If the answer is YES – then what your brain is doing – is making a LIBERTARIAN CHOICE.
.
A LIBERTARIAN CHOICE – is a choice that *YOUR* brain makes
It is not a choice that is made *FOR* your brain – by an external mind.
.
Consider the following example:
Billy is a 6 year old boy who is playing on the back padio.
Billy has a friend from next door – who is playing in his sand box.
The two of them are close enough to talk with each other.
Billy’s father comes out and tells Billy he is going to the Deli to get a treat for their supper.
Billy begs his father to bring him home a milk-shake from the Deli
.
The problem with the milk-shake is that Billy is dangerously lactose intolerant.
The last time Billy had a milk-shake from that Deli – his parents had to rush him to the hospital
While Billy’s dad is at the Deli – Billy tells his friend that he is going to get a milk-shake.
.
When Billy’s dad gets to the Deli – he looks at the milk-shake machine and decides he is NOT going to go through that experience again – so he *DETERMINES* that Billy will *NOT* have a milk-shake.
.
When Billy’s dad gets home – he tells Billy “No Milk-shake” and he hands Billy a soda instead.
.
Billy’s friend sees that Billy is *NOT* drinking a milk-shake
And Billy tells his friend “I CHOSE TO NOT HAVE THE MILK-SHAKE”
.
Did Billy tell his friend the TRUTH?
Or did Billy tell a lie?
.
The TRUTH is – Billy was not granted the option of making a CHOICE between having the milk-shake and NOT having the milk-shake – because *ONLY ONE OPTION WAS GRANTED TO BILLY*
.
Billy did not have a CHOICE between having the milk-shake – and NOT having the milk-shake – because the option to have the milk-shake did not exist for Billy to choose.
.
That story is the *MODEL* of how *DETERMINISM* functions.
.
If *DETERMINISM* is TRUE – then your brain is never granted the function of CHOOSING between TRUE and FALSE because only *ONE OPTION* can be *DETERMINED*.
.
Consequently – if DETERMINISM is TRUE and LIBERTARIAN CHOICE does not exist – then your brain is never granted the ability to CHOOSE between TRUE and FALSE on any matter.
.
So those people who try to argue that DETERMINISM is TRUE – are shooting themselves in the foot.
Because DETERMINISM does not grant their brains the ability to discern between TRUE and FALSE on any matter.
.
The same is TRUE for the Calvinist.
The doctrine of decrees does not grant the Calvinist brain the function of making a LIBERTARIAN CHOICE
Therefore the Calvinist brain is not granted the ability to CHOOSE between TRUE and FALSE on any matter.
.
Gregory Koukl
-quote:
The problem with determinism, is that…..rationality would have no room to operate. Arguments would not matter, since no one would be able to base beliefs on adequate reasons. One could never judge between a good idea and a bad one. One would only hold beliefs because he has been predetermined to do so. Although it is theoretically possible that determinism is true…..no one could ever know it if it were. Everyone of our thoughts dispositions and opinions would have been decided for us by factors completely out of our control. Therefore in practice, arguments for determinism are self defeating.”
.
Dr. John Searle – Professor Emeritus of the Philosophy of Mind and Language – Berkeley
-quote
“Rationality only makes a difference where there is the possibility of irrationality.
And all rational activity logically presupposes Libertarian Free Will.
This becomes obvious when one realizes that rationality is possible only where one has a choice among various rational as well as irrational options.” End quote – (Rationality in Action)
Therefore since the liberty to choose between multiple options is the quintessential definition of Libertarian freedom, it LOGICALLY follows – where Libertarian Freedom does not exist, neither does the ability to think rationally.
.
Blessings!
br.d
br.d
Here is a little joke about the belief that LIBERTARIAN CHOICE does not exist.
.
There once was a farmer who drove around on his tractor all day
Trying to convince people to adopt his belief system
When he would see someone afar off – he would drive his tractor over to them – and park the tractor – and get off and try to persuade them about his belief system.
.
His belief system was simply this:
Tractors don’t exist.
.
To understand the moral of the story – LIBERTARIAN CHOICE is like a vehicle with which the mind navigates.
Just like the tractor is a vehicle with which the farmer navigates
.
So the joke is – this farmer is totally reliant upon the very thing he insists does not exist.
.
The same is TRUE for the Calvinist who insists LIBERTARIAN CHOICE does not exist.
That Calvinist had to make a LIBERTARIAN CHOICE between TRUE and FALSE – in order to be able to insist his belief system is TRUE.
.
Thus we have what is called a SELF-DEFEATING argument.
I saw the article but didn’t read it. I just chuckled and told my son “So the scientist used their free will abilities to determine there’s no free will!?! Ironic.”
To me, concluding something like “there’s no free will” is so pointless and self-defeating that it’s not worth wasting time on.
And it makes me wonder, what purpose does it serve to declare there’s no free will?
Heather; “And it makes me wonder, what purpose does it serve to declare there’s no free will?”
Really sooooo true!!! Unless you hope there is NO freewill so much so that you have to shove a humanistic understanding of Who God is to justify something🤔 you and Br.D have great points and so silly of anyone to continue over and over to prove a point, that is self defeating…. see i don’t think every thought i have is a synaptic pathway controlled by my God i genuinely have a choice what i meditate on… God or man’s view of Him🌻
Psalm 119:15 NKJV — I will meditate on Your precepts, And contemplate Your ways.
Good to hear from you, Reggie. And good points.
Yeah, to me, a secular person (as I’m assuming the author of the article is, but I could be wrong) concluding that there’s no free-will will only lead to ridiculous conclusions not even worth considering. Especially because, as Br.d. pointed out, it just shoots them in the foot anyway. It would be like trying to make sense of nonsense.
But when a Christian claims there’s no free-will – in spite of the plain, commonsense teaching of the Bible – it doesn’t just shoot them in the foot and turn sense into nonsense, but it also does great damage to other Christian’s faith because it greatly damages God’s character, His Word, the gospel, people’s eternities, etc.. And so in that case, it needs to be addressed, fought against, and corrected.
That’s why I’ll address it if Christians say there’s no free-will, but I don’t care if secular people say it. Some fights are worth it, and some aren’t.
And as you said: “i genuinely have a choice what i meditate on… God or man’s view of Him”
And I think that’s why God delights in it when you choose to meditate on Him, to love, follow, and obey Him. It’s why it means something to Him – because you could’ve chosen something different, but you chose Him instead. You wanted HIM, despite the other options.
I can’t imagine how Calvinists can really think God finds any joy or glory in causing elect people to meditate on Him, to worship Him, to love Him. Real joy can only come from having real choices. Love and worship that is forced/manipulate/controlled is not real love at all. And I cannot imagine God getting any real delight or glory from that.
God bless you, Reggie! Thanks for your comment. 🙂
Heather
But when a Christian claims there’s no free-will – in spite of the plain, commonsense teaching of the Bible – it doesn’t just shoot them in the foot and turn sense into nonsense, but it also does great damage to other Christian’s faith because it greatly damages God’s character, His Word, the gospel, people’s eternities, etc..
.
br.d
Yes! Well said!
Also – forces the Calvinist to live *AS-IF* what (for him) the Bible teaches is FALSE.
.
In Calvinism everything that comes to pass within creation is said to be determined by an infallible decree.
No event is granted existence within creation unless that event is decreed.
.
So we start to recognize some very critical stipulations in that:
1) Prior to the decree ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS exist for Calvin’s god to choose among – in the process of determining what will come to pass for any given event.
.
2) That process of selection – requires that for every event Calvin’s god can select *ONLY ONE SINGLE OPTION* out of all ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS. Which means – he must *REJECT* all ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS.
.
3) The option which he selects will then be granted existence
And the decree will make that event’s existence infallible.
.
4) All of the ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS which he rejected are NOT granted existence.
And the decree makes their NON-Existence infallible.
.
.
*** THIS THEN BACKFIRES ON THE CALVINIST ***
For every event
1) There is no such thing as an ALTERNATIVE OPTION granted to man.
2) All ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS were infallibly rejected prior to the decree.
3) Therefore ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS only exist prior to the decree
4) ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS are not granted existence within creation – and their NON-Existence is made infallible by the decree.
.
THUS
5) Any time a Calvinist insists ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS exist for him to choose between – he is rejecting a critical stipulation of his doctrine.
.
6) John Calvin understood the dilemma. He understood it is humanly impossible to live *AS-IF* ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS do not exist for a person to choose between.
.
7) Calvin has to figure out a way to get around the dilemma his doctrine creates.
So he instructs the Calvinist to
-quote
“Go about your office *AS-IF* nothing is determined in any part”
.
8) Thus the Calvinist is forced to live *AS-IF* his doctrine is FALSE
9) Thus the Calvinist is forced to live *AS-IF* what the Bible teaches him is FALSE
.
CONCLUSION:
Calvinism is the only Christian belief system – in which the believer is taught to treat the Bible *AS-IF* what it teaches is FALSE.
Well said, Br.d. (I tried sending this once, don’t think if it went through. Hopefully you don’t get a duplicate.)
I think only Calvinists are okay with the idea of people having no real choices but still being held accountable for what they do. And if they are not okay with it then they trick themselves into thinking they are – because that’s what good, humble, God-glorifying Calvinists do. They dissociate themselves from the real conundrums and contradictions of their theology, choosing to live in an upside-down world while convincing themselves it’s right-side up and that everyone else is upside down.
In the book “Once an Insider, Now Without a Church Home” (written by a woman who watched her church being taken over by Calvinism), the author said that she had a discussion once with the Calvinist pastor about Calvinism’s contradictions when it comes to moral responsibility, and he asked her this: “Why do you so strongly insist that ‘one must have a free choice in order to be morally responsible’?” (pg 144).
In response to him, I’d have said “Umm … let’s see … why do we believe that in order to be justly held accountable for our decisions, we have to have the right to make decisions!?! Umm … DUH … because it makes sense. Because it’s logical. And because it’s the only way it can be if God is a truly just God. If we had no choice about sinning – if God caused us to make the choices we do but then held us accountable for them, if He punished us for the things He caused – it would make God an unjust, irrational tyrant. Not the loving, righteous, holy, just God of the Bible that He is.”
Only Calvinists would say it’s okay to hold someone morally responsible for something they had no real choice about, that it’s okay for God to cause us to sin and to be unbelievers but then to punish us for it. It’s insane. And it’s even more insane that they can’t see the damage this does to God’s Word and character. Just goes to show the cult-like power and influence of Calvinism.
Sad. Because so many churches are falling for Calvinism (for their “high view of Scripture and of God”) and so many well-meaning Christians are held hostage by it.
br.d
Yes!
All excellent points!
.
IMHO – the reason so many Churches are falling for Calvinism – is because Calvinism paints a glorified picture of itself – and people get seduced by that picture.
.
However on the issue of whether Calvinists have CHOICE or not – it has been my experience with many Calvinists that which I communicate with – the idea that they don’t have CHOICE in the matter of anything is a consequence of the doctrine they are simply not willing to accept.
.
Especially when one unpack-ages how that would mean their brains do not have the ability to choose TRUE from FALSE.
.
That is such a devastating consequence – no Calvinist can acknowledge it.
.
It really does resolve to the Calvinist being reduced to SUB-human.
Because it removes human functionality which all people consider NORMAL.
.
.
Calvinists above all else – are intensely protective of their image!!!
.
This was very clear in a presentation produced by “Premier Unbelievable?” where they intervewed William Lane Craig – and Calvinist Paul Helms
.
Premier Unbelievable – I believe is out of the UK – and focuses on theological questions.
In this interview the host asked Dr. Craig if his belief system incorporated “Free-Will”
He affirmed it did – and then went on to provide a very precise explanation of LIBERTARIAN freedom.
.
The host then asked Paul Helm’s the same – do Calvinist’s have Free-Will?
He said “Yes”
Then the host asked: “What kind of Free-Will do Calvinist’s have”?
.
His answer was – “The kind that everyone has”
And that was it!
He would not provide any details.
.
I could just see Dr. Craig’s face as he could easily recognize this a total evasion.
.
Paul Helm’s did not want to elaborate on the kind of free-will Calvinists have – because it would easily be recognized as SUB-human. So he simply obfuscated the subject.
.
Calvinists don’t want anyone to know those kinds of details about the belief system
Because people can easily connect the dots and recognize it makes the Calvinist SUB-human.
.
The function of CHOICE is solely and exclusively reserved for Calvin’s god alone – in the exercise of divine sovereignty
Per the doctrine – the Calvinist has no control over any impulse that will come to pass in his brain.
.
No Calvinist is going to acknowledge that – because if they did – no one would embrace their belief system.
These scriptures prove that man has a free will to choose salvation. The false doctrine of unconditional election, states that God chooses only certain individuals and all others will burn in Hell.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
Revelation 3:20 – Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
John 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.
Romans 10:9-10 – That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Mark 8:34 – And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
1 Timothy 2:4 – Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
John 3:16 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Revelations 22:17 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Matthew 11:28
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Proving you have free will and can resist the power of God
Romans 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Isaiah 55:6-7
6 Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: 7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
John 8:24
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
Galatians 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
Matthew 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
1 John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
Luke 10:16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.
Scriptures that prove that you can choose to backslide
Jeremiah 3:22 – Return, ye backsliding children, and I will heal your backslidings. Behold, we come unto thee; for thou art the LORD our God.
Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
2 Peter 2:20-22
20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
Revelation 2:3-5
3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
Proverbs 14:14 – The backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways: and a good man shall be satisfied from himself.
Hebrews 2:1-3
Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Luke 22:54-62 Then took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high priest’s house. And Peter followed afar off. And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them. But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him. And he denied him, saying, Woman, I know him not. And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not. And about the space of one hour after another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with him: for he is a Galilaean. And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew. And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And Peter went out, and wept bitterly.
Jesus understood that Peter would commit the sin of lying and would need to repent and be converted again.
Luke 22:31-32 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.
So you can choose to sin backslide, Choose to repent and come back to the Lord, just like the prodigal son.
Hello Rob and welcome
Hope the IT tech world is going well for you!
.
Blessings!
br.d
br.d , So basically you disagree with the article and the Scientist who argues Free Will doesn’t exist
br.d
What I posted makes total sense.
If LIBERTARIAN CHOICE does not exist – and DETERMINISM is TRUE – then your brain would not have any way of knowing one way or another – because:
1) DETERMINISM – by its very nature – does not grant the human brain the ability to CHOOSE between TRUE and FALSE.
.
2) The human function of discernment concerning the TRUTH-VALUE of any proposition – requires the human brain make a CHOICE between TRUE and FALSE on that proposition.
.
3) Since DETERMINISM does not grant the human brain the option of CHOOSING between TRUE and FALSE – it follows – the human brain cannot discern TRUE from FALSE on the matter of anything.
.
4) In such case – as Gregory Koukl stated – your brain would not have the capacity to know one way or the other whether DETERMINISM is TRUE or FALSE – because your brain wouldn’t have the capacity to discern TRUE from FALSE.
.
.
All prominent Determinists understand this conundrum – and every prominent Determinist will acknowledge he has to live *AS-IF* DETERMINISM is FALSE in order to retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
Here is Dr. Sean Carroll (Theoretical physicist – Atheist Determinist)
-quote
Every person in the world, no matter how anti-free-will they are, talks about people *AS-IF* they make decisions.
.
What Dr. Carroll is saying – is that as a Determinist – he knows DETERMINISM does not grant his brain the ability to make decisions.
.
Dr. William Lane Craig
-quote
Nobody can live *AS-IF* all that he thinks and does is determined by causes outside of himself.
Every Determinist recognizes he has to act *AS-IF* he has option(S) to weigh, and can decide on what course of action to take.
.
Here Dr. Craig is agreeing – – – every person who adopts DETERMINISM as a belief system – is forced to live *AS-IF* DETERMINISM is FALSE in order to retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
John Calvin also understood the dilema
-quote
“Hence as to future time, because the issue of all things is hidden from us, each ought to so to apply himself to his office *AS-IF* nothing were determined about any part.” (Concerning the eternal predestination of god)
.
.
So the point is this.
If DETERMINISM is TRUE – then your brain does not have the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE.
.
Every Calvinist who assumes his brain is granted the function of CHOOSING between TRUE and FALSE – is assuming his brain is granted the function of LIBERTARIAN CHOICE.
.
So what I’m telling you is – the writers of that article are shooting themselves in the foot.
.
It would be like you assuming you are human – try to prove humans don’t exist.
That is why DETERMINISM is a self-defeating belief system
.
If you’re having trouble understanding that – go back and read my post enough times so that your mind can connect the dots.
.
This may be a new subject for you
And it may take some pondering over the subject – in order for you to see the logic of it.
What do you think about the article, Jeff? Do you agree or disagree with the idea that there’s no free will?
Heather , br.d and Everyone Else
Often I’m Honestly Not Sure who or what to believe many times, with all the information, misinformation, disinformation and Fake News on the Internet, Social Media and in Real Life
I’d like to say that as a
Christian, I truly do hope Jesus Returns to Earth Real Soon , literally no later than 2025
To Eliminate all Evil, Suffering and Injustice in the World, once and for All Forever.
Countless people in America and Worldwide are Suffering in Silence from various problems,
Countless people are Very Afraid of the Future, in this Uncertain,Chaotic World often filled with sadness and suffering so I hope Jesus Returns Soon, literally no later than 2025
Imagine a Perfect World as the Bible Describes
A World with True Peace and Stability
Where there will be No More Suffering, Evil or Injustice, No War, No Racism, No Poverty, Or Hunger or Homelessness, No Fear or Uncertainty or Anxiety, No Crime, No Violence, No Bigotry or Hatred, No Animal Cruelty, No Loneliness, No Mental or Physical Disease or illness, No Hectic Stress Filled Rat Race , No Natural Disasters, etc , Where Love & Friendship, close face to face Friendship is Everywhere
See the Bible verse
Revelation 21:4
Hello Jeff,
And thank you for your wonderful post!
.
There are many people in this world who refuse to acknowledge what you so willingly and sincerely will acknowledge.
.
There are belief systems which are designed to give people a FALSE SENSE of confidence and assurance.
.
As you may suspect me to say – Calvinism is one of those belief systems.
.
FIRSTLY:
Calvin’s god creates the vast majority of the human individuals he creates – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
John Calvin
-quote
Those who perish are DESTINED to hell by the eternal GOOD PLEASURE of god. Though the reasons do not appear, then they are NOT FOUND but MADE worthy of destruction. (Concerning the eternal predestination of god)
.
SECONDLY:
Calvin’s god creates a large percentage of believers – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The Lord…. INSTILLS INTO THEIR MINDS such a sense…..as can be felt WITHOUT the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
.
John Calvin
-quote
He ILLUMINES ONLY FOR A TIME to partake of it; then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
CONSEQUENTLY:
No Calvinist has any CERTAINTY of what he was specifically created for – because they have no way of knowing if Calvin’s god has deceived them with a FALSE SENSE of salvation.
.
.
From your last post here – it is obvious you have a very kind and sincere heart.
And you are to be applauded for your sincerity and your honesty
.
My hope and prayer for you – is that you would keep on asking and seeking the Lord as you have been.
.
But my greater hope and prayer for you – is that you would continue to grow and mature – in the process of being a CRITICAL THINKER.
.
Learning how to ask questions – and learning to exercise your mind to be able to THINK RATIONALLY so that your discernment will continue to grow and mature.
.
I am very heartened – especially by your last post!
I thank you for it!
Your friend
Br.d :-]
Jeffster: “Often I’m Honestly Not Sure who or what to believe many times, with all the information, misinformation, disinformation and Fake News on the Internet, Social Media and in Real Life
I’d like to say that as a Christian, I truly do hope Jesus Returns to Earth Real Soon…”
Amen, brother! It’s my prayer every day.
About Human Suffering, Myself and others are reminded of the Bible verse
Revelation 22:20 which says
“He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.”
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.” The sooner Jesus Returns the Better
I told a fellow Christian friend of mine back in 2020 that for the sake of Argument, If I was God , I would Not just passively allow Human Suffering, Evil & Injustice to Continue. That if I was God I would simply clap my hands and make the World into a Perfect Utopian Paradise . Just to Clarify
I’m an Evangelical Protestant, Not a
Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormon. I base my views on Heaven and the Coming New Earth on
Revelation Chapters 21 & 22
I also suggest reading the various editions of the book
Heaven: by Randy Alcorn , it’s Superb
Plus, Countless people in America and Worldwide are Unable to Enjoy their Lives in the Present, because of their painful pasts and they are Afraid, Very Afraid of the Future , the sad reality is for many Suffering people things Never Get Better , just worse and worse
Countless people feel as if they are walking on Eggshells
Very Afraid of the Future
Myself and Countless Other Christians hope Jesus Returns soon , no later than 2025
Countless people are Suffering and Miserable, Lonely and Very Afraid of the Future, in these uncertain chaotic Unpredictable times , they desire and crave True, Peace, Stability and Happiness that will ONLY Exist in Heaven and the New Earth, these Christians realize that this True, Peace, Stability and Happiness is Impossible in this present Earthly Life, it will Only Come in Heaven and the New Earth
No one in Heaven and the New Earth will be Afraid of
“Suffering, Evil or Injustice, No War, No Racism, No Poverty, Or Hunger or Homelessness, No Fear or Uncertainty or Anxiety, No Crime, No Violence, No Bigotry or Hatred, No Animal Cruelty, No Loneliness, No Mental or Physical Disease or illness, No Hectic Stress Filled Rat Race , No Natural Disasters, etc ” because Everyone in Heaven and the New Earth will Know and have Peace of Mind that None of those things will Ever Happen to Anyone at Anytime, it can’t and won’t happen, so no one will ever be Afraid or Worried, There will be True Peace and Peace of Mind Knowing these horrible things will Never Happen Again, there will be Love and Close Face to Face Friendship, Fellowship for Everyone, Never Again will anyone suffer from crippling, debilitating loneliness, Social Isolation, etc.
Everyone in Heaven and the New Earth will Know for a Fact that Nothing could possibly go wrong, Nothing will possibly go wrong
br.d, Heather, etc.
I should have added
The Bible verse
Matthew 6:10 says
“Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” English Standard Version , I truly do hope Jesus Returns and Ends All Evil, Suffering and Injustice in the World, Once and For All Forever, by the End of 2025 , What do you think of my other comments of
yesterday November 7, 2023
Jesus cannot return soon Enough,
Everyone in Heaven and the New Earth will Know for a Fact that Nothing could possibly go wrong, Nothing will possibly go wrong, Nothing will ever go wrong
It deeply upsets me and other Christians the Horrible Sufferings in America and Worldwide
br.d
Yes – very true!
We Christians here in America are extremely blessed even with the degree of corruption that exists among us.
.
There are Christians in other lands – who are brutalized and murdered for the name of Jesus.
We Christians here in America are isolated from that.
.
We bless and thank the Lord for each and every day he gives us to live in peace.
But scripture tells us what is coming.
.
br.d
The Calvinist Christian website
carm.org has an article by
Matt Slick headlined
“Does everything happen for a reason?” on May 11, 2016
It’s an interesting article, some say of course everything happens for a reason, but that’s not the same as everything happening for a
Purpose
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
The Calvinist – as you must be aware at this point in time – embraces a belief system that is in conflict with itself.
.
Calvinism incorporates what is called DUALISM
.
In Calvinism’s form of DUALISM “Good” and “Evil” are Co-Equal, Co-Necessary, and Co-Complimentary.
.
In scripture the believer is taught that it is forbidden to commit evil that good may come.
And it is forbidden to call “Evil” good – and to call “Good” Evil.
But that rule does not apply to Calvin’s god – because it would compromise divine sovereignty.
.
In Calvinism – every sin and every evil is FIRST CONCEIVED in the mind of Calvin’s god.
Those sins and evils which he CONCEIVES in his mind – he then MAKES come to pass INFALLIBLY.
.
Thus we have the following:
Every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within the human brain is FIRST CONCEIVED within Calvin’s god’s mind.
.
Calvin’s god’s decree then MAKES each sinful evil impulse come to pass within the human brain INFALLIBLY
.
Creation – and thus the human brain is FALLIBLE
.
And it is impossible for that which is FALLIBLE to resist that which is INFALLIBLE
.
Therefore in Calvinism – every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within the human brain is MADE IRRESISTIBLE
.
Now the typical Calvinist – is perfectly comfortable emphasizing “Good” events which Calvin’s god MAKES infallibly come to pass by a decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE.
.
But the typical Calvinist is NOT comfortable emphasizing “Evil” events which Calvin’s god MAKES infallibly come to pass by a decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE.
.
Consequently – Calvinists spend a great deal of time involved in DOUBLE-SPEAK TAP-DANCE ROUTINES trying to obfuscate the “Evil” which the doctrine stipulates Calvin’s god FIRST CONCEIVES and then MAKES TOTALLY IRRESISTIBLE to the human brain – and doe not grant man a CHOICE in the matter of what he decrees to IRRESISTIBLY come to pass within man’s brain.
.
So I can already tell you what Matt will be doing is working to MAKE JUSTIFICATIONS for sinful evil events which are CONCEIVED in Calvin’s god’s mind – and then MADE IRRESISTIBLE to the human brain.
.
For John Calvin who is the UNFLINCHING TRUE Calvinist – Calvin’s god can create whatever evil he wants to create and the Calvinist is required call whatever Calvin’s god makes come to pass “Good”.
.
So you can see how close to the line – the Calvinist comes to calling Good Evil and calling Evil Good.
.
Therefore what we have in Calvinism’s form of DUALISM is a system of GOOD-EVIL
And Calvin’s god is a god of GOOD-EVIL
.
Calvin’s god is predominantly MALEVOLENT towards his creatures
And minimally BENEVOLENT towards his creatures.
.
He creates the vast majority (THE MANY) specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire for his GOOD pleasure.
.
That is the component of DUALISM which is incorporated into Calvinism.
And Matt is going to have a vested interest in making Evil appear LESS Evil.
.
You should be able to understand what his urgency is.
.
Blessings!
br.d
It frustrates me no end to read Calvinist like Slick speak of God permitting and allowing evil. He knows better. His theology has no place for God just permitting and allowing. As Calvin would correct Matt… God thought all evil up, decreed it to occur and brought it about all for his good pleasure. Please Mr Slick, stop with the “permit” and “allow” language and man up to your evil theology!
Hello Larry
.
Yes – this is one of the unfortunate effects which Calvinism has on its advocates.
It teaches them to justify the use of deceptive language.
.
Calvinists practice what linguists call INSIDER language
This is a language practice in which a group will take words or terms which have STANDARDIZED meanings – and the group will ATTACH altered meanings to those words.
.
As you point out – Calvinism’s use of “Permission” language is a primary example.
.
John Calvin explains
-quote
When [Augustine] uses the term “Permission” THE MEANING WHICH HE ATTACHES TO IT will best appear from a single passage (De Trinity. lib. 3 cap. 4), where he proves that the will of god is the supreme and primary CAUSE of all things….(Institutes 1, 16, 8)
.
Here you can see what is happening.
Calvin reasons as follows:
1) What Calvin’s god CAUSES by divine decree – he “Permits”
2) What Calvin’s god DOES NOT CAUSE by divine decree – he does not “Permit”
.
So what we clearly see here – is words such as “Permit” and “Allow” are being used as REPLACEMENT words for the word CAUSE .
.
The Calvinist does not want to tell people his god CAUSES by infallible decree – every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within man’s brain – and MAKES those impulses come to pass infallibly – and thus IRRESISTIBLY within man’s brain.
.
The Calvinist knows if he tells people the TRUTH – they will reject the doctrine – and Calvinism will go the way of the dinosaur.
.
So they use REPLACEMENT words.
In this case – the words “Permit” or “Allow” are used instead of CAUSE
.
.
If you think about it – what the Calvinist is doing with words – is creating what scripture calls a FALSE BALANCE.
.
A FALSE BALANCE occurs – when a weight is placed on a balancing scale – and that weight has an IDENTIFIER or label – which states its weight – but the person who puts that weight on the scale has ALTERED its weight.
.
The money changer in the temple for example – can cheat his customer by putting a weight that is slightly heavy on the scale – making it the case that his customer has to give him more coins than he really should be giving him.
.
Thus with every transaction – he cheats his customers.
.
Words and terms – are a CURRENCY of exchange.
He who can ALTER the values of words and terms – can take advantage of others – the same way the dishonest money change cheats his customers with ALTERED weights on the balancing scale.
.
The money changer refuses to conform to the STANDARDS which are set for weights
Those STANDARDS are established to ensure people are not cheated.
As long as all parties conform to the STANDARD no one gets cheated.
.
The Calvinist follows the same pattern as the money changer.
He refuses to conform to the STANDARD meanings of words and terms.
.
The money changer gains an advantage by “slight of weight”
The Calvinist gains an advantage by “slight of words”
.
Thank you for your post!
Blessings!
br.d
I totally agree, Larry. This is one of the things that makes Calvinism so deceptive, so cult-like. so “slick.” They speak on multiple levels and have hidden definitions for words. I think it’s how it slips in and spreads so easily, because the average Christian is unaware of what they really mean underneath the things they say.
Like Br.d. points out, Calvinists have their insider language. And those in-the-know will catch on and know what they’re saying. But those not-in-the-know won’t, and they’ll be deceived because they are trusting that they can take what the Calvinist says at face-value, trusting that the Calvinist says what he means and means what he says.
Their deceptive tactics bother me so much more than if they just came right out and were honest with their bottom-line beliefs. And I think it’s how they’re taking over churches. (I actually just published a post on this very thing, called “The 9 Marks of a Calvinist Cult” at anticalvinistrant.blogspot.com.)
Blessings to you all!
That’s right Larry!
Calvinists claim that God ordains and decrees it all (per Calvinism) and then claim that He just “permits” and “allows” it (like the rest of us)! That are always wanting to have it both ways!
br.d, Heather, Larry, it’s me Jeff aka Jeffster again
About the Topic of God, Free Will and
Human Suffering, a person earlier this November 2023 typed on Social Media
“God in Christianity is the ultimate mafia boss.
The Mafia boss demands that you give something of value to protect you from his own violence. This is the same as God.
God isn’t saying “Pray, believe and glorify me and I will protect you from a rival God.” He is saying “Pray, believe and glorify me and I will protect you from my wrath.”
If the consequences of exercising your free will are so dire that exercising your free will causes eternal damnation in the fiery pits of hell, then you really don’t have free will, just as the Mafia boss doesn’t give you free will.
Progressive theologians focus on the NT loving and hippy parts of Jesus’ message. However, they ignore the immoral repugnant basis of Christianity in general. Or progressives will deny the resurrection which places them outside Christianity entirely. I find it fascinating how progressive Christians try to put lipstick and a modern spin on an immoral bronze age belief system.”
Hello Jeff,
I can understand what the author of that article is trying to say. However, I think he’s looking at it from the wrong angle.
Many people think of it like this: “We are all bound for heaven as long as we keep doing good enough, but God is just watching and waiting for when we screw up so that He can punish us. God holds hell over our heads to keep us in line. He threatens us with punishment if we mess up too much.”
This seems to be the way the author presents it, that God threatens to punish us if we step out of line.
But I see it this way: God isn’t threatening to punish our sins if we step out of line. He isn’t threatening us with hell or holding it over our heads. He is warning us that that’s the path we are on, and He is offering to save us from that path. He pleads with us to accept the salvation He offers so that He save us from punishment.
As you quoted, the author says “Pray, believe and glorify me and I will protect you from my wrath.”
The thing the author fails to understand is that we got ourselves into the mess we’re in, and God is trying to save us from the consequences of our own choices. And not only that, but He made salvation possible for us by first dying in our place. He paid a very heavy price for us, so that we don’t have to pay it.
God is not threatening to punish us if we’re not good enough. He took the punishment that we deserved so that He could make us “good enough,” so that we could be saved from punishment. And that’s a big difference.
Blessings to you, Jeff!
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
The mafia boss analogy breaks down and collapses in the face of a loving Father who sends his only begotten Son to die and pay the price – for the sins of those who killed him.
.
Those whom he created – and lovingly placed within a garden of Eden.
.
But as you will remember – the temptation man was faced with in the Garden – was the temptation to give up being ONE with God – in order to be LIKE God.
.
The serpent – as is detailed in Isaiah 14:13
-quote
“I will ascend to heaven and set my throne above God’s stars. ”
.
Lucifer was the original creature with the desire to give up being ONE with God – in order to be LIKE God.
.
The craving that Lucifer developed in his heart – was the very craving he understood he could temp man with.
.
.
Agape love (Greek ἀγάπη ) is SELF SACRIFICING Love.
.
You will not find self-sacrificing love in a Mafia boss.
.
The poor unfortunate person who attributes those characteristics to God – is simply looking at God through the lens of his own characteristics.
.
The critical component of the temptation in the Garden was to get man to perceive God as selfish.
.
We pray for that poor unfortunate person – because he is in bondage to the very characteristics he attributes to God.
.
***HOWEVER***
The god of Calvinism is a completely different story!!
.
Here we have a deity – who designs the vast majority of the creatures he creates – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his GOOD pleasure.
.
As John Calvin states it:
-quote
By the eternal GOOD PLEASURE of god THOUGH THE REASON DOES NOT APPEAR they are NOT FOUND but MADE worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
Additionally – Calvin’s god designs a large percentage of BELIEVERS also for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his GOOD pleasure.
.
These believers – he creates as CHAFF believers – divinely deceiving them with a FALSE SENSE of salvation.
.
John Calvin explains
-quote
The Lord….instills into their minds such A SENSE …..as can be felt without the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
.
-quote
He ILLUMINES ONLY FOR A TIME to partake of it; then He….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
.
In Calvinism – all of the promises to the believer are identified as the ENUNCIATED will of Calvin’s god – which in many cases is the exact opposite of the SECRET will of Calvin’s god.
.
So when the Calvinist reads “you are beloved” within scripture – he has no way of knowing if the SECRET will of Calvin’s god (as it pertains to himself) is the exact opposite.
.
These Calvinists will go through their whole lives having FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation – which have been decreed to infallibly come to pass within their minds.
.
They will eventually wake up in the lake of fire – and at that point realize they were created as CHAFF believers.
.
Their purpose is serve his GOOD pleasure by existing for eternity in fire and torment.
.
Now many would say – that god is even more horrible than a Mafia boss.
.
That is why John Calvin declared that his conception of god’s intent for mankind (the infallible decree) filled him with a sense of horror.
Br.d.: “The mafia boss analogy breaks down and collapses in the face of a loving Father who sends his only begotten Son to die and pay the price – for the sins of those who killed him.”
So well said! Great job putting it in a perfect nutshell. 🙂
br.d
Thank you Heather!!
And I always appreciate your kind and caring heart the Lord has blessed you with.
Growing into the measure and stature of Christ! :-]
Thank you, Br.d. I appreciate that. 🙂
The book Heaven by Randy Alcorn is Superb , do we think that
Heaven and the New Earth will a
Theocracy ? I discussed Heaven and the New Earth on my blog
About my Mother
ripmrswinters.blogspot.com
It’s really sad how actress
Suzanne Somers passed away on
Oct 15, 2023 at
Age 76 , but on the bright side, she is alive, fully conscious and self-aware , every bit as much as I am right now as I type these words , her Final Destination will be the New Earth ,
It’s a Real pleasure to interact with everyone here . I truly do hope Jesus Returns Very Soon , Real Soon, no later than the year 2025
br.d
Hello Jeff
I’m not familiar with that book
And I didn’t know Suzanne Somer’s was a believer in Jesus
.
Perhaps I don’t get out enough! :-]
br.d , Yes Suzanne Somers was a Christian , multiple online sources confirm this
I just sent my daughter home with a copy of Randy Alcorn’s “Heaven” today. I loved it. I wasn’t aware that he was a Calvinist when I read it, and I don’t recall seeing the doctrine in it. In fact, I’ve read his novels too, and didn’t recall that theology, so it rather surprises me. But then again, I wasn’t looking for it.
I landed in the non-calvinist camp several years ago because I couldn’t get past the idea that a “good” God could create people that he knew were going to be condemned, and not provide them with a way out. My church is currently doing the new city catechism sermon series, so when my pastor mentioned that it was written by Tim Keller, I immediately (during the service lol) looked up whether he was a Calvinist, and that’s how I found your website… Which honestly, is a more interesting read than my pastor’s sermons, even on a good day.
I will have to re-read the book when I get it back and see if I can identify calvinistic teachings in it. Anyway, thank you for this website. My family is talking about finding a different church, but we’re not sure where to go. Are there any denominations that are intentionally non-calvinist?
Thanks for your help.
br.d
Thank you very much Pamela – and welcome
.
What you will find with any Calvinist literature – is that it is filled with DOUBLE-SPEAK.
We understand that language is the outward expression of human thought.
The outward expression of DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS is going to be DOUBLE-SPEAK.
.
The reason this is the case with Calvinists is because the doctrine is so radical that no Calvinist can emotionally embrace it and at the same time retain any sense of human normalcy.
.
The doctrine stipulates that every instance in time is 100% meticulously pre-determined having been fixed by infallible decree.
Every instance in time cannot possibly be other than what it was decreed to infallibly be.
Every sinful impulse which comes to pass within the Calvinist brain – cannot possibly be other than what it was decreed to infallibly be.
.
So in order to retain a sense of human normalcy – the Calvinist is forced to live *AS-IF* the doctrine of decrees is FALSE.
.
So we have a very strange phenomenon in Calvinism
He will assert the doctrine as TRUE – while simultaneously treating the doctrine *AS-IF* it is FALSE.
.
That is why – NON-Calvinists have perennially observed – the Calvinist talks like a Calvinist – but he lives like an Arminian.
.
The Calvinist knows – if he tells the TRUTH about his doctrine – other believers are going to reject it.
Consequently – Calvinists spend a great deal of time and energy trying to make their doctrine APPEAR to be what they calculate NON-Calvinists will accept.
.
So there is a very unfortunate (yet consistent) degree of dishonesty within Calvinist representations.
.
One has to be extremely careful when reading any Calvinist literature.
A large percentage of it contains strategically designed FALSE representations.
They are representations – which the Calvinist calculates the NON-Calvinist will accept.
.
It takes time for the NON-Calvinist to learn and recognize when a Calvinist’s representation is FALSE
And it is very easy to be mislead by FALSE representations.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Pamela: “My family is talking about finding a different church, but we’re not sure where to go. Are there any denominations that are intentionally non-calvinist?”
Hello, Pamela. Sorry to hear that you guys might have to find a new church. That’s never easy to do. (We left the church we had been at for 20 years because Stealth Calvinism took over. I blog about it at anticalvinistrant.blogspot.com.)
But I applaud you for being willing to make the change, and for researching things for yourself instead of merely accepting whatever you’re told. If more people did that, the Church probably wouldn’t be in the mess it is.
I’m not sure if there are any specifically non-Calvinist denominations. It seems to me that we have to carefully evaluate each and every church, regardless of denomination. Ours was an Evangelical Free Church, and I know they are being slowly taken over by Calvinism. And the SBC has had a lot of problems with it. So I’d definitely be cautious about those. And Lutheran, from my research, has Calvinist leanings.
You might be better off trying a non-denominational church or a community church. But be careful of other issues with those churches, such as wokeness, prosperity gospel, charismatic/pentacostal-type things (speaking in tongues, being slain in the spirit, etc.), “universalism-type” theology, etc.
I really think we are in a time when we have to carefully evaluate each church on its own, when we can’t trust a label anymore. May God help your family find the right church. God bless!
Heather,
The one word that stands out to me, regarding calvinism, is the word, “Evangelical”, and “Baptist”.
For example, the Southern Bapists don’t mind making a home for Calvinists.
Any time someone states the word, “Evangelical”, that puts a sour taste in my mouth. It states, “Calvinism” to me. Even “Liberty University” fell into it.
My advice is to read every church’s, “We believe” statements, and some of those will be pretty descriptive of calvinist beliefs. Sometimes, they are hidden in the words, but you can recognize them.
Ed Chapman
br.d
Yes!
For me – I was a believer for many years prior to the point where the labels “Evangelical” and “Calvinism” had anything in common.
.
Calvinists have been working very hard to STEALTH infiltrate any NON-Catholic form of Christianity
And especially those NON-Catholic forms of Christianity which had the greatest growth statistics.
The reason for that – is because expansion is Calvinism’s highest priority
One will notice that Calvinisms – out of all theologies – exhibits a very intense urgency for marketing itself
.
Historically – Calvinism rejected charismatic forms of Christianity
And maintained a strong emphasis on the doctrine of cessation.
.
However the charismatic movement sprang up in the 70s
Charismatic denominations began to exhibit the greatest growth statistics.
.
Since Calvinism’s highest urgency is to expand and market itself – it quietly moved from its strict stance on cessation – and started working to STEALTH infiltrate charismatic churches.
.
I might be wrong – but I believe it was then – that Calvinists started adopting “Evangelical” as a label simply because they wanted to align themselves with whatever form of Christianity had the best grown statistics.
.
Calvinists are like Chameleons.
They will MASQUERADE their doctrine in whatever form they calculate will provide the best ROI
Most Calvinist churches today wear a highly ARMINIANIZED mask – simply because most Calvinists find the the doctrines implications of divine evil unpalatable.
.
I bump into Calvinists all the time – who reject John Calvin’s writings because he does not flinch at explicating the fact that Calvin’s god creates and designs the vast majority of the human population – as well as a large percentage of believers – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
Calvinists do not want to hear – they have a high probability of having been created for a lake of fire.
And Calvinist pastors are well aware of that fact.
And that is why they MASQUERADE their doctrine – trying to make it as ARMINIANIZED as possible.
Ed, Yep, that’s how I see it too. “Evangelical” and “Baptist” both raise my eyebrows. Maybe unfairly because many churches within those denominations are not Calvinist, but I think it’s spreading in them so much that we need to be careful. Blessings! 🙂
Br.d.: “One will notice that Calvinism – out of all theologies – exhibits a very intense urgency for marketing itself.”
Totally! I agree with Kevin Thompson that Calvinism is a cancer. And it needs a host to feed on, which is in many cases evangelical or Baptist churches. Calvinism is more about hijacking other churches and those who are already Christians than it is about evangelizing non-believers. I wouldn’t be so bothered by it, though, if they were upfront about their views and agendas. It’s the stealth part that gets me. The deception and manipulation.
br.d
Yes!!!
Big time!!!
Well said Heather!!
Hi Jeff, I looked up your blog. So sorry to hear about your mother passing away. (My mother-in-law passed away in 2014 too, from a brain tumor.) It sounds like you had a good relationship with her. I hope so. I noticed you posted something about Fred Rogers. I really like him too. I’ve read a few biographies on him in the last couple years, and I always enjoy reading about him. It’s peaceful and relaxing. Such a good guy. We need more like him, 🙂
God bless.
br.d, Heather and Everyone Else, Glad you like my blog
Do we think from a Biblical Perspective that Heaven and the New Earth will be a Theocracy ?
Some have said that to a certain extent God does want human beings to suffer, because they say it builds character, helps them grow closer to God, etc
But these same people also stated that if God does want human beings to suffer to a certain extent, God still certainly does Not like it when people suffer . What do we think ? On the blog I mentioned
CBS Storybreak and
“How to Eat Fried Worms” among other topics, All Worth reading
Like I said Jesus cannot Return Soon Enough
br.d
Hello Jeff,
Concerning Heaven – Jesus instructs us t pray “Thy kingdom come – thy will be done – on earth as it is in heaven”
.
So given that – I think that gives us a pretty clear picture of what we might call a Theocracy.
.
And in scripture God says:
My dwelling place also will be with them; and I will be their God, and they will be My people.
.
And in Revelations is says:
Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them,
.
So what I see – is a God of love – who wants to express his love on his creatures.
But the Apostle Paul tells us: Love does not seek its own
.
And I see God’s love as giving and caring desiring the best for his creatures.
.
However – it is true that he sets before his creatures – both life and death – because he wants them to be free to choose.
.
He doesn’t want a bride that is forced to love him – or does not have a choice in the matter.
He wants her to love him for who he is – not because he can decree “Love” impulses to infallibly come to pass in her brain which do not grant any ALTERNATIVE
.
When God says – behold I set before you both life and death – he also pleads with his people that they “choose life that you may live”
.
So personally – I see heaven as a place where God’s people will consider themselves to be totally blessed to be with a wonderful loving, caring, and giving creator.
Hi Jeff, no one knows yet exactly how heaven will look/act, but I do think God will still be ruling in heaven. But He will be a good, benevolent, kind, loving ruler, so we won’t be afraid of His rulership. We will want a God like that ruling.
But I’m not sure what you mean when you said: “Some have said that to a certain extent God does want human beings to suffer, because they say it builds character, helps them grow closer to God, etc.”
Are you asking if we think there will be suffering in heaven? Or is it just about conditions now on earth?
I think there will be no more suffering in heaven because suffering is the result of sin, and sin will be no more in heaven.
But on earth, I think it’s an inevitable result of being given the right to make real choices. Suffering is the consequence of sin affecting us, other people, and nature itself (in the Genesis Fall).
I think God does not want us to suffer (which is why He’s so careful to spell out boundaries and rules, a way of living that will help us have the best life possible). But since He wanted to give people the right to choose, He had to allow the possibility of sin and suffering, even if He doesn’t like it.
But I think His plan is still to do away with suffering, and He will do that in heaven. And in the meantime, on earth, He tries to keep us on the best path possible, and He hurts when we hurt, and He promises to work all the pain into something good. It’s His way of turning the bad (which He didn’t cause or want) into something good.
I’m not sure if that answers your question, but it’s what popped into my head. Blessings!
Br.d.: “So personally – I see heaven as a place where God’s people will consider themselves to be totally blessed to be with a wonderful loving, caring, and giving creator.”
Amen to that!
Hey everone,
Can I kindly suggest that you trade emails and discuss all topics outside of soteriology (Calvinism) on another platform.
Not only does it make for a lot of emails in my inbox but I’m guessing it dilutes our message when the passers-by come to read some of our more pertinent comments about how God provides for all!
br.d
Thanks FOH
I think what would be preferred is that we has people to refrain from posting comments or questions unrelated to Calvinism in order to minimize posts coming into peoples emails.
.
Thanks
FOH,
WADR (with all due respect), As if in a court of law, “I object! Goes to motive of God’s character in Calvinism as to what his character is after we die, since religion is all about the afterlife anyway.”
My objection may get sustained, but…
FWIW, I’ve got 13,948 emails that I need to delete at some point in my life, after deleting some 40,000 last year.
FOH, I understand the frustration of too many emails. I myself don’t get notifications of new comments, so I’m probably not as affected by it as you are. However, it seems to me that hardly any comments are posted here anymore, compared to what it used to be like. So I like seeing the few comments that do pop up. At least someone is sharing ideas and inviting conversation, even if they are not totally on point for Calvinism. (I myself prefer reading and writing comments on a blog instead of, say, on a YouTube video or something. Blog comment sections allow for a better back-and-forth and deeper connection, I think.)
And I think that discussing God’s rulership in heaven and whether or not He wants suffering is akin to discussing Calvinism’s idea of sovereignty and that God causes bad things for a reason. It might not be exactly the same, but I think it falls within the realm enough to be on this blog. But maybe that’s just me.
Either way, I’m still happy to see any new comments that pop up here, especially since I’m a rather lonely, introverted person who doesn’t comment in any other comment section on any other platform.
And personally, I don’t think it does water the message down. I think it actually brings the people who comment here to life more, helping us connect more with what they say and understand where they are coming from. It might not get us to the point faster, but it makes the relationships and conversations deeper. And I like that. (But I’ll try to limit my comments here, to help cut down on your overloaded inbox.)
God bless! 🙂
Heather; “And I think that discussing God’s rulership in heaven and whether or not He wants suffering is akin to discussing Calvinism’s idea of sovereignty and that God causes bad things for a reason.”
I actually agree 100% Heather though i do get many emails as well… and if i have time i read them all!!! if not i can choose not too ie true freedom not compatibilistic freedom (corresponding to my strongest desire). But that being said, i actually trust doctrine in general matters, because if we err in our doctrine hmm shouldn’t we keep a teachable mindset!! I have come to find soteriology, eschatology etc. is tied into a person’s world view in many ways.. So though i find it important i do understand what FOH is saying yet I’m still trying to figure out did Paul consider this issue or soteriology etc. secondary??? the fact is that God elevates His Word above His name.
Psalm 138:2 NKJV — I will worship toward Your holy temple, And praise Your name For Your lovingkindness and Your truth; For You have magnified Your word above all Your name.
So anyway I have read some of Randy Alcorn’s book, but to be fair and honest when i realized his soteriology view i stopped. Ugh not saying this is right or wrong, but again i find when I’m trusting God and His Word above man then the clarity & inconsistencies of calvinism are much more clear! 🌻
Heather:
I respect your opinion and appreciate what you write so often (if not always!).
But my points and suggestions are:
1. It makes our good information hard to find with so much other stuff in the thread.
2. It is off topic in many people’s mind (even if not in yours) (will they unsubscribe?)
3. What I did for years on this site was post daily (after my daily through-the-Bible reading) all of the verses IN THAT ONE DAY’S READING that contradicted Calvinism. It was like a tidal wave of evidence (no cherry-picking Calvinist style).
So…. I would welcome people doing that!
Please post here or in another thread what you read TODAY and how that spoke to you both in a good way and in a Calvinist-error way.
Hi Reggie, thanks for commenting. You said: “So anyway I have read some of Randy Alcorn’s book, but to be fair and honest when i realized his soteriology view i stopped. Ugh not saying this is right or wrong, but again i find when I’m trusting God and His Word above man then the clarity & inconsistencies of calvinism are much more clear!’
Yeah, I too have a hard time reading anything from a Calvinist, even if it’s not related to soteriology, because Calvinism seeps into all their views on all biblical issues. So everything they say will be based on fundamentally wrong beliefs about God and faith and salvation. Not that we can’t get anything good from them, but I still can’t stomach even the good things they say because I know what’s hiding underneath.
God bless you, Reggie!
Reggie,
And you asked “I’m still trying to figure out did Paul consider this issue or soteriology etc. secondary???”
I don’t think Paul considered issues of salvation secondary at all.
1 Cor. 15:3-4: “For what I received I passed onto you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures,”.
This – the gospel, how we can be saved because Christ died for our sins – is of “first importance.”
1 Timothy 2:3-6: “This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who gave himself as a ransom for all men…”
This message is the very reason Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John recorded what they did.
John 20:31: “But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”
The message of salvation offered to all people is of first importance. And so in my thinking, if we get that wrong, it doesn’t really matter what else we get right.
And Calvinists get it wrong.
FOH: “Please post here or in another thread what you read TODAY and how that spoke to you both in a good way and in a Calvinist-error way.”
Good idea. And I see what you mean now by “water down,” that it would make it harder to find the Calvinist-related comments, not necessarily that it would dilute the meaningfulness of the blog. Makes sense. And blessings to you. 🙂
br.d, Heather and Everyone Else
Hope we all had a Great Thanksgiving , sorry to go a little bit off topic but
You Know how we have the terms
B.C. for “Before Christ” and
A.D. which is Latin for Anno Domini
“In the year of the Lord” when Jesus Christ Returns in the
Second Coming, which I hope is No later than
the End of 2024 . When Jesus Returns and Ends All Evil, Suffering and
Injustice in the World once and for All, Forever
Will a New term be created similar to
B.C. & A.D. something like R.C. which would stand for
Return of Christ , because it would be the beginning of a New Era for All
Humanity , the Whole World , a major turning point for the Human Race
Do you think that in Heaven and the New Earth Christians will each have a Nice Large House
All to themselves with an Exact Duplicate Copy of All their Earthly Physical
Possessions, Do you Speculate TV shows, Movies, Books, Magazines, Video Games, Computers, Internet, Social Media,
Our Beloved Pets will Continue to Exist ? Sports, Music,
Also does the United States Government and other World
Governments take the “Rapture” Doctrine seriously. What Emergency Plans do they
Have in place for when Hundreds of Millions of Christians suddenly
vanish into thin air and are “beamed up” as they say in Star Trek
What plans are in place for those who are “Left Behind”
Have you ever heard of something called
Project Blue Beam ? Not to be confused with
Project Blue Book ? What is your opinion on UFO’S and so-called
“Alien Abductions” Are you a Pre-Trib or Post-Trib Rapture Believer
Thanks for answering ,
Hello Jeff,
And thank you for your kind ThanksGiving greetings!
.
On your other questions – one of the users here at SOT101 has asked if we would refrain from discussions outside of the topic of Calvinism – because he feels he is being inundated with posts coming into his incoming email.
.
So I’ll leave it at that.
And a very warm and Happy ThanksGiving to you!!!!
.
br.d :-]
Hello Jeff, I hope you had a great Thanksgiving too. Without elaborating, I will say that I am definitely a pre-trib believer (and I don’t think we’ll care about the possessions we left behind on earth because I think whatever we get will be so much better, much more perfect).
And to bring this comment into the realm of Calvinism, I will add that while Calvinists fall on both sides of the debate (pre-trib vs. post-trib), from what I can tell, Calvinists who believe in a post-trib rapture (as our Calvinist pastor does) might do so because it’s the only way they can explain “elect” people being on earth during the tribulation, as seen in Revelation. Because if all the Calvinist elect are supposed to go up in the rapture, then it can’t be a pre-trib rapture. And so to make the rapture and Revelation fit their view of election, they move the rapture to post-trib. I, however, think they mistime the rapture to accommodate their wrong views of election.
Along these lines is the idea of when the millennium kingdom is or if there even is one. I believe the rapture is first, then the tribulation, then the millennium kingdom. But, if I’m not mistaken, didn’t the EFCA just change their statement of faith to allow for amillennialism? I’m not sure why they did this, but I wonder if it has something to do with Calvinism taking over EFCA churches.
Blessings to you, Jeff! Have a great holiday season.
Heather, br.d and Everyone else
Back in 2018 a Christian on
Facebook typed
“Its not God Will that evil happens. God’s Will and what God allows are not one and same.
God did not create robots, God allows people their own self physical (fleshly) will and most people they bring on themselves suffering and much is allowed by anti-God people.” How should we reply ?
jeffster,
The other day, I listened to a Christian on YouTube that discussed those being atheists, that say that if God was such a loving God, why does he allow evil to take place?
So the Christian responded by taking it back to the atheist belief, removing God from the equation, and then asking the atheist why does man allow evil to take place?
Ed Chapman
Ed, That’s a thought-provoking turn-around of the question that would lead to some interesting conversation, wouldn’t it?
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
There are two completely different answers to this question.
There is the Calvinist answer
And then there is the NON-Calvinist answer
.
John Calvin starts us off with the Calvinist answer:
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
CRITICAL FACTORS:
1) In Calvinism *EVERYTHING* without exception within creation is pre-determined and *FIXED* in the past by an infallible decree – and cannot possibly be other than what it was decreed to infallibly be.
.
2) An infallible decree does not grant any *ALTERNATIVE* from that which it decrees
.
3) An infallible decree *ONLY PERMITS* what it decrees
.
4) An infallible decree *ONLY ALLOWS* what it decrees
.
So – if it is decreed that you will perform SIN_X at TIME-T – then
– That decree does not grant the existence of any *ALTERNATIVE*
– That decree *ONLY PERMITS* you to perform SIN_X at TIME-T
– That decree *ONLY ALLOWS* you to perform SIN_X at TIME-T
– Since *NO ALTERNATIVE* is granted existence to you – it follows – you are NOT granted a *CHOICE* in the matter of whether you will perform SIN_X at TIME-T or not – because the option to NOT perform SIN_X at TIME-T does not exist
.
So it is critical that you understand how terms like *PERMIT* and *ALLOW* are defined within Calvinism
.
1) What Calvin’s god CAUSES – he permits
2) What Calvin’s god DOES NOT CAUSE – he does not permit.
.
.
The NON-Calvinist system does not have the doctrine of decrees.
So it is NOT the case the *EVERYTHING* is *FIXED* in the past by an infallible decree
.
This means
1) *ALTERNATIVES* exist within creation
2) People are granted CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE is *UP TO* the person.
.
So in the NON-Calvinist system –
– You have the option to SIN at TIME-T
– You also have the *ALTERNATIVE* option to NOT SIN at TIME-T
– You have a CHOICE between those two options
– That CHOICE is *UP TO* you.
.
If you have further questions on this topic – please don’t hesitate to ask
.
Blessings
Br.d
Hello Jeff, I say that Br.d. is right: “There are two completely different answers to this question. There is the Calvinist answer, And then there is the NON-Calvinist answer.”
Calvinists get it wrong because they think God’s will MUST happen and that it’s synonymous with everything that happens. And this is because they wrongly define sovereign as God preplanning, controlling, causing all things. (But this cannot mesh with Bible verses like “God is not willing that any should perish.” And so Calvinists redefine who the “any” is, saying that it must not mean He wants all people to be saved but just the elect – because, in their minds, God’s will always happens and so God cannot will that all people are saved because not all people are saved.)
In their minds, if He wills something, it must happen, and everything that happens is because He willed it (preplanned/caused it). They simply cannot accept the idea that God allows things He doesn’t want to happen and allows things He does want to not happen. They cannot accept the idea that God gave mankind the right to make real decisions with real consequences that affect what happens.
But God’s will is not about what must happen or what God preplans/causes (as Calvinists define it). It’s about what God wants to happen, His preferred plans (as the Greek defines it, as seen in the concordance). It’s what He wants for us (His best plan for us, the best option) – but He has chosen to not always force what He wants. He has chosen to allow us to decide for ourselves if we want what He wants or not, if we will cooperate with Him or not, obey Him or not. And yet, He can still work our choices – whether we choose for Him or against Him – into His overarching plans, bringing good out of it somehow.
Yes, He does make plans and cause certain things to happen, and He has overarching plans that will be carried out one way or another. But just because He plans some things and causes whatever He plans to work out doesn’t mean that He plans everything to happen the way it does or that He gives people no choices.
God has overarching plans for mankind, but He allows us the freedom to make decisions within boundaries in our own lives, on the way to working His plans out. And our decisions – making real choices among real options – affect what happens in our lives and in others’ lives. We can choose to do His will or not (to do evil or good), and it will affect our lives, world, and eternities.
But whether we obey or disobey, He can still find a way to work our decisions into His overarching plans, even if we have to pay the price and face the consequences for the choices we make. (I think I’m rambling, but I hope you get the picture.)
Ironically, Calvinists think an all-controlling God is a “Big God.” But I think they actually have a small, limited god because their version of God can only handle what he himself preplans/causes. He cannot handle any outside forces affecting his plans.
But I think the God of the Bible is much bigger, wiser, more complex, and more mysterious than that. He can allow people to do things He doesn’t want (sin and evil) and not do things He does want (believe in Jesus, obey Him), and yet He can still find a way to work it all into accomplishing His overarching plans. This is how God meshes the free-will of man with His sovereign control: He allows us to make real choices with real consequences, but then He finds brilliant ways to work it all into His plans, to bring something good out of it.
Dr. Tony Evans compares life to a football game. God sets the boundaries and writes the rulebook and watches over the game as referee, but He allows us to decide how we play the game and what we do on the field. And these decisions affect our lives. This is why it’s so important to always consult and live by the One who wrote the rulebook and set the boundaries, especially if we want to have the best lives and eternities possible. He’s always willing to guide us and lead us in the best path for us (His preferred will for us), but sadly we’re not always willing to seek it or obey. And so we create consequences that didn’t have to happen. (But even then, there’s forgiveness, and God will help us set things right again if we turn to Him in our brokenness.)
This is how I see things regarding the question you asked. Thoughtful question, Jeff. I hope my answer helps, instead of confuses the issue more. God bless! And happy holidays. 🙂
Merry Christmas Everyone
A person typed online recently
“It’s amazing how every Calvinist believes they’re part of the “chosen few” that God is going to save. At its core it’s a very self centered “religion”. Every Calvinist on Calvinism:
“God chose me and not those other people.”
But it’s far more likely that someone is born in the “non-elect caste” so why don’t we ever find Calvinists who think the “system” is true, but who believe they were born non-elect? If Calvinism were true, we would expect to find large numbers of people who not only think Calvinism is true, but think themselves to have been born non-elect instead of elect. But contrast that with the reality (?🙄) of Calvinism where the ONLY people who believe in the Calvinist system are (shocking!) those who believe they were born elect and are saved. Where are the Calvinist non-elect who believe their system is true but don’t think they’ve been born elect? And yes, Calvinism is absolutely a “caste” system” What do we think ?
br.d
Hello Jeff – and Merry Christmas!!!
.
Yes you are totally correct.
The doctrine stipulates – not only does Calvin’s god created the vast majority (THE MANY) of individuals – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
But he also creates a large percentage of believer for that end as well.
These are called CHAFF believers – who he deceives with a FALSE SENSE of salvation.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The Lord….instills into their minds such *A SENSE* ..as can be felt *WITHOUT* the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
He illumines *ONLY FOR A TIME TO PARTAKE OF IT* then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
-quote
A *SMALL* and contemptible number are hidden in a *HUGE MULTITUDE* and a *FEW GRAINS* of wheat
are covered by *A PILE* of chaff. We must leave to god alone the knowledge of his church, whose foundation
is his SECRET election. (Institutes 4.1.4)
.
I think you can understand what kind of burden that is going to impose on a person’s mind.
.
We are told by Neurologists – that the human mind experiences dread internally – as a form of pain.
And the natural instinct is to do whatever it might take to relieve oneself of that pain.
.
I think therefore – its a natural instinctive response to the doctrine – for the Calvinist to try to put away any thoughts of being created for the lake of fire.
.
And yes – when I ask Calvinists about this – a very typical response is they assume CHAFF believers are anyone and everyone – *EXCEPT* Calvinists – and especially anyone but themselves.
.
Calvin himself acknowledged that his conception of divine intent for mankind filled him with horror.
.
Calvinists today – do not have the decree of honesty which Calvin had in his day.
They are taught to have such a high urgency to promote and defend the doctrine.
.
And Calvinist leaders have – over the years – engineered a library of talking-points – all designed to HIDE the DARK aspects of the doctrine – and make it *APPEAR* to be a doctrine of benevolence.
.
But Calvin’s god is primarily a god of malevolence towards his creatures
And minimally benevolent.
.
John Piper – for example – was noted for acknowledging to his congregation that he did not know if his two sons had been created for damnation.
.
But he would never divulge to his congregation – the same question about his own salvation.
He knows – if he divulges that to his congregation – say to themselves – if John Piper does not have assurance of salvation – then how can we.
.
Blessings!
And Merry Christmas!
br.d
Another comment recently typed online about Calvinism said
“Luke 8:12 Makes No Sense if Calvinism is True
Calvinism is the false idea that God has chosen all who will be saved and all who will be damned before anyone was born
In the parable of the Sower in Luke 8, the devil snatches away the Word from people’s hearts so they can’t believe and be saved
If Calvinism is true, there is no need for the devil to snatch away the Word since those chosen by God will inevitably believe and be saved
Calvinism contradicts the belief that God wants everyone to be saved and that Jesus died for every person
Satan tries to snatch away the Word because he knows Calvinism is heresy and a false gospel
Calvinism is a lie straight out of the pit of Hell and anyone who believes it is falling for demonic lies”
br.d
Yes – this follows the pattern that every NON-Calvinist observes – where the activities of created beings – such as Lucifer and man – appear in the form of a puppet show.
.
In Calvinism – humans do not “Commit” sins – they “PERFORM” sins on behalf of Calvin’s god.
.
Impulses which human brains – and the actions of human bodies – do not originate from within those humans.
All impulses and actions have their origin in an infallible decree which is external to every human.
.
Every impulse that comes to pass within the human brain – is AUTHORED at the foundation of the world.
.
The decree makes all human function IRRESISTIBLE:
.
Every impulse comes to pass within the human brain infallibly
And since it is impossible for creation to RESIST that which is infallible – it follows – all impulses come to pass within the human brain IRRESISTIBLY
.
That is why you see IRRESISTIBLE grace as an advertisement strategy used by Calvinists.
The Calvinist doesn’t think you will be adverse to grace being IRRESISTIBLE because grace is “Good”
But what he is not telling you – is that an infallible decree makes everything IRRESISTIBLE which comes to pass within creation
.
So all sins and evils – by virtue of being MADE infallible – are MADE IRRESISTIBLE.
.
That is why in Calvinism – people do not “Commit” sins – they “PERFORM” sins
And the decree makes the “PERFORMANCE” infallible and IRRESISTIBLE
.
This creates a significant problem for the Calvinist – in regard to things like Divine “Intervention” and Divine “Prevention”
.
When you think about it – you will recognize Divine “Intervention” and Divine “Prevention” cannot exist in Calvinism any more than oxygen can exist within a perfect vacuum
.
It works this way:
1) The only events which can be “intervened” or “prevented” are events which *ARE* going to come to pass.
.
2) There is no such thing as “Intervening” or “preventing” a NON-Existent event.
.
3) In Calvinism – the only events which *ARE* going to come to pass – are events which have been decreed
.
4) All events which have been decreed – are decreed to come to pass with INFALLIBLE EXACTNESS which cannot be “intervened” or “Prevented”.
.
If Calvin’s god – is a perfect being – then everything he decrees to come to pass – will come to pass perfectly.
He does not make mistakes that he would need to “Intervene” or “Prevent”.
And why would a perfect being “Intervene” or “Prevent” something that is already perfect?
.
This becomes a problem for the Calvinist – because he desperately wants these things to exist within his belief system. But they cannot exist within the doctrine of decrees any more than oxygen can exist within a perfect vacuum.
.
So in order to have what his doctrine does not give him – the Calvinist must create them in the form of SEMANTIC FACADES. These things exist as a MAGICAL FANTASY within the mind of the Calvinist – because they are logically impossible.
.
Blessings
br.d
I read a comment attributed to St. Bernard: remove free will and there is nothing to save. Remove grace and there is nothing to save with. Why do calvinists even talk about salvation? Thank you kay
br.d
Hello Kay and welcome
Wonderful post – and very insightful!
.
Yes – that is correct.
Your statement speaks to the IRRATIONAL and IMMORAL nature of salvation in Calvinism.
.
Calvin’s god has two provisions for mankind:
1) His *PRIMARY* provision is for THE MANY
Eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure
.
2) His *SECONDARY* provision is for THE FEW
He saves a few from his *PRIMARY* provision.
.
So in Calvinism – humans are not being saved from themselves
He decrees damnation for THE MANY
And THE FEW are saved from what he decrees for THE MANY.
.
How the Calvinist cannot see that picture as both IRRATIONAL and IMMORAL – is a mystery of the human nature.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Also clarion-journal.com has an article headlined
“SATAN: Old Testament Servant Angel or New Testament Cosmic Rebel?” by Richard Murray on
November 14, 2013 Any opinions on how it relates to our
Debate about Calvinism ? Could we give real life examples of events in real life that might seem to show if Calvinism is somewhat true
br.d
Hi Jeff,
.
Lets unpackage this logically:
.
1) The foundational core of Calvinism is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as enunciated within Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
2) Lucifer is a created being – and is thus obviously identified as one of “the creatures”
.
3) Thus we have – a doctrine which stipulates *NOTHING HAPPENS* within the brain of Lucifer that Calvin’s god did not knowingly and willingly decree.
.
4) This coincides with the Calvinist conception that there is no such thing as creaturely *AUTONOMY*
.
5) Therefore – it would logically follow that Lucifer would obviously be recognized as a “Servant Angel”
.
6) However – it is logically impossible to be a “Rebel” without some degree of *AUTONOMY*
.
7) The decree which determines every impulse within every creature’s brain (including Lucifer) is infallible
.
8) All creatures within creation are fallible
.
9) It is logically impossible for that which is fallible to “Rebel” against that which is infallible
.
10) Therefore in Calvinism – it is logically impossible for any creature (including Lucifer) to “Rebel” because that would entail that which is fallible falsifying that which is infallible.
.
CONCLUSION:
In Calvinism – Lucifer – along with all creatures – is identified as a “Servant” in that the creature is granted NO ALTERNATIVE from what is infallibly decreed
.
But in Calvinism Lucifer cannot be construed as a “Rebel” because that would represent a denial of the doctrine of decrees.
Also I forgot to add, the 2006 book
“When God Winks at You: How God Speaks Directly to You Through the Power of Coincidence”
by Squire D. Rushnell can that somehow relate to our Calvinism debate ?
br.d
On the subject of how Calvin’s god communicates – we need to bear in mind that Calvin’s god will purposefully deceive people.
.
Let’s take an example:
.
Bill and Andrew are twin brothers – who are now grown up adults
Bill is a Calvinist
Andrew is a Jehovah’s witness
.
Bill and Andrew both enjoy reading the ESV Bible
Bill is reading a certain verse within the ESV Bible – and his PERCEPTION of that verse is that [X] is TRUE
Andrew is reading the same exact verse within the ESV Bible – and his PERCEPTION of that verse is that [X] is FALSE
.
The PERCEPTION within Bill’s brain is that [X] is TRUE
The PERCEPTION within Andrew’s brain is that [X] is FALSE
.
Logic tells us that two things in opposition cannot both be TRUE at the same time.
.
If Bill’s PERCEPTION is TRUE – then Andrew’s PERCEPTION must be FALSE
if Andrew’s PERCEPTION is TRUE – then Bill’s PERCEPTION must be FALSE
.
Now – we add Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees – which stipulates that *NOTHING HAPPENS* within creation that is not knowingly and willingly decreed.
.
1) The PERCEPTION within Bill’s brain – was decreed at the foundation of the world to come to pass infallibly
2) The PERCEPTION within Andrew’s brain – was decreed at the foundation of the world – to come to pass infallibly
.
One of these PERCEPTIONS is FALSE
.
SUMMARY:
Calvin’s god decreed the PERCEPTION within Bill’s brain – to be a FALSE PERCEPTION
or
Calvin’s god decreed the PERCEPTION within Andrew’s brain – to be a FALSE PERCEPTION
.
In either case – Calvin’s god has decreed a FALSE PERCEPTION to exist within a human brain.
.
So we have a FALSE PERCEPTION which is FIXED within a human brain by an infallible decree
.
That decree cannot permit that human brain the ability to *DISCERN* that PERCEPTION as FALSE – because then it would be the case that that person would no longer have that as a FALSE PERCEPTION.
.
CONCLUSION:
In Calvinism – every FALSE PERCEPTION which exists within every human brain – is FIXED by an infallible decree – which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE.
.
Whatsoever deception comes to pass within the human brain – is decreed by Calvin’s god.
And that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE PERCEPTION within that human brain.
.
Therefore – Calvin’s god is a god of deception.
br.d
Jeff – take a look at a very short video on Youtube by Dr. Timothy Stratton of Free Thinking Ministries
.
The title of the video is: For Calvinists, God will deceive them.
.
When you follow Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees to its logical conclusion – you recognize
1) The ability to “DO OTHERWISE” than that which is infallibly decreed does not exist for the creature
.
2) For the human brain to choose between TRUE and FALSE on any proposition – would require brain’s ability to “DO OTHERWISE”
.
3) To choose TRUE is to “DO OTHERWISE” than to choose FALSE
.
4) To choose FALSE is to “DO OTHERWISE” than to choose TRUE
.
5) In Calvinism – there is no such thing as the creature being granted the ability to “DO OTHERWISE”
.
6) Therefore – in Calvinism – the human brain is not granted the ability to choose TRUE from FALSE on any proposition.
.
7) The human function of discernment of any proposition – requires the ability to make a choice between TRUE and FALSE concerning that proposition.
.
8) That ability does not exist for the Calvinist brain – because it would entail the brain’s ability to “DO OTHERWISE”
.
CONCLUSION:
The Calvinist brain is not granted the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE on any matter.
Thanks, Also I found this online comment from 2019 that said
“JOHN 3:16 HAS BEEN MISTRANSLATED! Here is the promised essay!
What did Jesus mean by Perish in John 3:16? Santo Calarco
The most powerful and famous verse in the whole Bible, words spoken by Jesus himself, are misleading in English translations.
John 3:16
Whoever believes in him will not PERISH but have everlasting life.
The Greek word, sloppily translated, PERISH is ἀπόληται.
In western Christian thought to “perish”has been understood to mean… To go to hell or to be annihilated. So the common western understanding of this famous verse goes like this: unless you put faith in Jesus you will miss out on eternal life (go the heaven at death) and instead go to hell… Perish!
Jesus did not mean this at all!
Before we look at what the Greek word actually means, let’s consider the unfolding story line leading up to this climactic verse.
Nicodemus has approached Jesus and enters into a conversation with him. He said to Jesus that God was with him because of the signs that he saw him do. John 3:1-2
Nicodemus was impressed with physical visible signs Jesus performed. Jesus set out to take him deeper. Jesus responded and challenged the spiritual insight of Nicodemus.
Here is a typical translation of the English text containing Jesus’ response to Nicodemus.
John 3:3 ESV
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
The way western Christianity has traditionally explained this statement goes like this … “unless you accept me as your saviour by being born again you will never go to heaven after death” – that is never see the kingdom of God.
The English in this verse does not accurately convey the Greek.
The Greek does not say “born again”. Neither does it say “Kingdom of God”!
Consider Young’s Literal Translation of the Greek.
John 3:3 Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)
3 Jesus answered and said to him, `Verily, verily, I say to thee, If any one may not be born from ABOVE, he is not able to see the REIGN of God.
So instead of saying “born again” the Greek reads “born from above”. Instead of “kingdom of God” the Greek says “reign of God”.
So what?
In modern western Christian thought we are told that to be “born again” means that our first birth is faulty – evil. Born totally depraved according to Calvinism.
Hence we need to be born again. But this is not what the Greek actually says.
The Greek says being “born from above” not being born again! Jesus is not saying that our first birth was faulty or evil! Psalm 139 says that God has knitted us individually in the womb.
Neither did Jesus speak about the “kingdom” of God. The Greek word translated “kingdom” actually means “reign”. We saw this in Young’s Literal Translation.
So what? In English “kingdom” and “reign” DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.
When we talk about United Kingdom we often think of a place, a territory. But the Greek word Basilea means REIGN of the monarch not the territory. The kingdom of God is about the RULE OF GOD – not a place.
If we go with kingdom being a “place” then we begin to think in terms of going to heaven. But Jesus is talking about the reign of God – inside of us.
Matthew 13:19
When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his HEART.
Matthew 13:19 Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)
19 Every one hearing the word of THE REIGN, and not understanding — the evil one doth come, and doth catch that which hath been sown in his HEART
See? The kingdom message is about the REIGN OF GOD IN OUR HEARTS in the HERE AND NOW.
So what did Jesus mean in response to Nicodemus… Based on the Greek?
Nicodemus focused on the external signs that he saw. Jesus shifted his focus to the invisible reign of God within.
Jesus is saying to Nicodemus that unless he is born from above that he won’t SEE OR PERCEIVE THE REIGN OF GOD WITHIN.
This is supported by the following verses.
John 3:6-7,23 International Standard Version
6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is BORN of the SPIRIT.
7 Don’t be astonished that I told you, ‘All of you must be born FROM ABOVE’
12 If I have told you people about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about HEAVENLY things?
So Jesus is talking about the need for a change in perception. We need to start seeing things from a heavenly perspective… A spiritual perspective… This is what it means to be born from above. Unless we start to gain spiritual insight (not based on the physical eye), we will miss out on experiencing God’s reign in our lives in the here and now.
Jesus is not saying that unless you believe in him and get born again that you’re going to go to hell after death.
This is the immediate context of John 3:16.
Let’s consider verses 14-15.
John 3:14-15
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.
Now let’s pause right here. Something important is happening. Jesus just spoke about entering and seeing (perceiving) the internal reign (kingdom) of God by believing.
He now changes his words. To enter into and see the reign of God within means the same thing as having ETERNAL LIFE BY BELIEVING.
TO ENTER THE KINGDOM MEANS THE SAME THING AS ENTERING ETERNAL LIFE!
I will come back to this. In these verses Jesus tells us what we need to understand in order to be born from above.
He said that we need to understand what his death is about. “Just as Moses lifted up the serpent so too Jesus will be lifted up and as we see and believe this you have eternal life (enter enjoy experience the internal reign of God).”
When we understand the Cross we know that we have been born from above, from the Spirit.
This goes beyond seeing physical signs.
We have arrived at John 3:16. Jesus repeats what he just said and elaborates.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Jesus places “perish” in contrast to “eternal life”.
They mean the opposite thing for Jesus.
Now here is where it gets really exciting for me. Elsewhere in this same book Jesus defines what he means by “eternal life”!
John 17:3
And this is eternal life, that they KNOW YOU, the only true God, AND JESUS and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
WOW!!
Eternal life does not mean living forever in heaven after we die. Eternal life simply means KNOWING GOD – intimacy with God!
Eternal life is qualitative not quantitative. It’s relational not temporal.
This means that to enter the reign (kingdom) of God, to have eternal life simply means to ENTER INTO AN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP WITH FATHER!
And Jesus is saying we enter into this relational dimension as we are born of the spirit, born from above AS WE UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF HIM BEING LIFTED UP ON THE CROSS.
In the book of John we read “he who has seen me has seen the Father … the Father and I are one! “ John 14.
John 1:18 Christian Standard Bible (CSB)
18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side —he has revealed him.
See?!! Jesus came to show us what God is like.
As we put faith in Jesus we get the exact revelation of the Father. And once we know that the Father is like Jesus … it’s only then that we can enter into relationship with him. How can we enter into relationship with anyone without knowing what they are like?
So Jesus comes to earth … is raised up on the Cross and says: “when you see me getting killed … as you see me pronouncing forgiveness on you while you kill me … you are seeing the Father through me!”
Wow! We are now born from above.
Let’s conclude by looking at the word “perish”.
Jesus said that whoever believes in him (revealing the truth of the crucified forgiving God), will eternal into intimacy with the Father (enter the reign, eternal life”?). If we don’t get this revelation then we PERISH.
Context demands that perish is the opposite of eternal life. Since eternal life is knowing God then to perish simply means you don’t know God personally because you have not yet believed that Father is exactly like Jesus.
To perish simply means you are not in relationship with God at the present time because you are not born from above. You have not yet believed in Jesus and so cannot see the truth about God and so can’t enter into relationship with God.
I will even go further.
The Greek word translated “perish” actually means “to be lost”!
Lost not because this means you are going to Hell after death … but lost simply because you currently don’t know Father by believing that Jesus has revealed the truth about him!
Here is the Greek translated “not perish”: μὴ ἀπόληται. I believe that this phrase more accurately should be translated as “not be lost”. Why?
This identical phrase occurs elsewhere in John and is NOT translated “not perish”!
The below passage is identical in Greek but instead of “not perish” it says “not be lost”!
John 6:12 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
12 When they were filled, He said unto His disciples, “Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost (μὴ ἀπόληται).”
What follows has been cut and paste from Bible Hub. Note the way that bible hub has placed the following two verses one after the other.
“John 3:16 V-ASM-3S
GRK: αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ
NAS: believes in Him shall not perish, but have
KJV: should not perish, but have
INT: him not might perish but might have
John 6:12 V-ASM-3S
GRK: μή τι ἀπόληται
NAS: so that nothing will be lost.
KJV: that remain, that nothing be lost.
INT: nothing anything might be lost”
So even bible hub shows the inconsistency in translations.
Why do tanslators say “not perish” in John 3 but “not be lost” in John 6 when the Greek is the same?
Lost and perish don’t necessarily mean the same thing! Something can be lost and then found. But when something perishes it sounds pretty permanent.
The Greek word ἀπόληται comes from apolummi which simply means to be lost AND DOESN’T MEAN A PERMANENT STATE OF DAMNATION. In fact in the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son, Jesus uses the exact same Greek word as John 3. And the point is this: being lost comes just before being found and saved! Luke 15.
Jesus said a number of times that he came to seek and save that which is lost. Luke 19:10. The Greek is apolummi once again.
Being lost precedes being found.
Conclusion. When Jesus said that those who do not believe in him end up perishing, all he saying is this: they are simply in the current state of being lost which he defines as not knowing God. That’s all. There is nothing inherent in this word that means a permanent irretrievable or beyond repentance state. In fact in other places this same word is directly connected with being found after being lost.”
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
Firstly – any post anyone makes which is overly long – is going to be a post no one is going to bother to read.
So I would suggest you moderate the length of your posts
.
Secondly – on the subject of whether anyone perishes – you have Jesus’ statement in Matthew chapter 25
-quote
“And he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. ……… they [the goats] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
And in Matthew chapter 5
-quote
It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
.
So in one place Jesus speaks of Hell – and in another place Jesus speaks of eternal punishment.
One can assume he is talking about the same place in both instances.
.
And in Calvinism it works this way:
.
John Calvin
-quote
By the eternal *GOOD PLEASURE* of god = though the reason does not appear , they [the damned] are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
Another comment I found online from 2020 is
“Three years ago today, I renounced universalism, which I had taken on as my religious stance for a while. No one hit the unfriend button over it, but there was a very long discussion.
I think being a universalist was an important part of my journey that led me to dig deeper and to stop believing a lot of false/faulty things.
Someone labeled my view as “hyper Calvinism” and after self examination, I realized that was true. I also didn’t like the de-emphasis of faith and belief. Also, I figured out the view I had of “sovereignty” was totally wrong.
After intensive study in the Spirit, I saw that “eternal fire” only does one of two things – 1) turns to ash (totally consumes, the individual is “no more”) 2) purifies. I saw that faith and belief and acceptance are very necessary to BE and to experience the salvation of all.
I saw that “heaven versus hell” is not what Jesus and prophecies discussed. It was kingdom Life (on earth) verses “fire” (outside the “open gates” to the “Holy Place” on earth). No talk of “eternity” or “final destination in eternity” anywhere.”
Jeffster,
I have long proposed that Calvinism and Universalism are essentially the same.
They both say that God does it all to (imposes it all on) man. They just differ on the number!
A certain number are saved no matter what they think, plan, believe, do or want.
One says a teeny tiny fraction of man, and the other says all….. but it is based on the same idea.
Happy New Year Everyone
Some More Thoughts
Some people have suggested the
1991 book titled
“The Other Side of Calvinism” by Laurence M. Vance
Plus the book
“Christian Soldier’s Battle Notes”
Volume 1 by John Davis, Fourth Edition , Published in 2020
On pages 93 to 105 , the section is called
“The Errors of Calvinism”
My point is, can we humans ever really know if Calvinism is true or partially true in this life, how can we grasp an infinite God , how can we even begin to Grasp it, other than the very basics. So many Countless different Interpretations of Scripture, endless back and forth debate, it seems unsolvable
and impossible to know for certain
Endless debate and Interpretations in English, different translations and Bible versions in English, but also in the Original Greek & Hebrew
Calvinist James White in one video online says
God ordains both the ends and the means. We might disagree with
James White on some topics, but he has written Superb books in Defense of The Trinity, so he is correct on many things
What about people who are Happy being Calvinist Christians , and have come to believe Calvinism is true through intense study , some people have even said that the Bible hopelessly contradicts itself on certain issues, with verses both for and against a certain viewpoint , that some debates are unsolvable, only God alone knows for certain
br.d
Hello Jeff and thank you for your kind words – and happy New Year to you also!
.
Let’s address your primary question
.
Jeff:
-quote
My point is, can we humans ever really know if Calvinism is true or partially true in this life, how can we grasp an infinite God , how can we even begin to Grasp it……
.
br.d
In order to TRUTHFULLY address this question – we need to TRUTHFULLY ACKNOWLEDGE what Calvinism stipulates
.
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that NOTHING HAPPENS but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
It is critical that we acknowledge the fact – an infallible decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
.
For example – if it is decreed that you will be born on the month of January – then that decree does not grant the option of you being born on any ALTERNATIVE month.
.
So in Calvinism – because everything within creation is 100% meticulously determined to infallibly come to pass – then it follows – every human event – and every human impulse – is determined in the past by an infallible decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE
.
Now lets say that James White is required to take a Bible exam.
And all of the questions on the exam are TRUE/FALSE questions
Jame’s brain comes in contact with the first question – at TIME-T
.
The doctrine stipulates whatsoever comes to pass is infallibly fixed at the foundation of the world by an infallible decree.
.
Therefore the PERCEPTION which comes to pass within James’ brain concerning the first question – is fixed at the foundation of the world by an infallible decree.
.
At the foundation of the world – Calvin’s god has two options:
OPTION_A:
The PERCEPTION within James’ brain will be that the answer is TRUE
OPTION_B:
The PERCEPTION within James’ brain will be that the answer is FALSE
.
Now remember – an infallible decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees
.
IF CALVIN’S GOD DECREES OPTION_A:
OPTION_A is granted existence
OPTION_B which is the ALTERNATIVE is not granted existence.
The infallible decree does not even permit James’ brain to PERCEIVE the answer as FALSE.
.
IF CALVIN’S GOD DECREES OPTION_B:
OPTION_B is granted existence
OPTION_A which is the ALTERNATIVE is not granted existence.
The infallible decree does not even permit James’ brain to PERCEIVE the answer as TRUE.
.
Are you noticing something here????
James brain is not being granted the ability of making a CHOICE between TRUE and FALSE
The PERCEPTION in Jame’s brain is determined by factors outside of his brain’s control.
.
In order for James’ brain to choose between TRUE and FALSE the PERCEPTION in his brain would have to be UNDETERMINED. And that would make Calvinism FALSE.
.
Now lets say – Calvin’s god decrees James’ brain to PERCEIVE the answer as TRUE – while Calvin’s god knows the correct answer is FALSE.
.
We now have a compounded situation:
1) The decree does not permit James’ brain the ability to PERCEIVE the truth
2) Jame’s brain is not permitted the ability to discern between TRUE and FALSE on this matter
3) The PERCEPTION within Jame’s brain was FIXED by infallible decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE
.
Jeff
At some point you are going to need to come to grips with this!
You need to recognize there are SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES with Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
This situation provides just one simply example – of how Determinism within Calvinism works.
.
Because the doctrine stipulates that EVERYTHING WITHOUT EXCEPTION is determined at the foundation of the world – it follows EVERY PERCEPTION which comes to pass within every human brain – is determined at the foundation of the world by a decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE.
.
Calvin’s god not only creates the vast majority of the human population for eternal torment in a lake of fire.
He also decrees a large percentage of the believing population to have FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation.
These believers are created as CHAFF believers.
.
John Calvin
-quote
But the Lord….instills into their minds such A SENSE as can be felt without the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
.
John Calvin
-quote
He illumines ONLY FOR A TIME to partake of it; then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
So it becomes obvious – that within Calvinism we have the DECEPTION OF THE BELIEVER
.
In the case of James White taking the Bible exam – we have an example of the DECEPTION OF THE BELIEVER.
.
In the case of CHAFF believers – we have a second example of the DECEPTION OF THE
BELIEVER.
.
So the Calvinist answer to your question – is – an infallible decree determines every PERCEPTION in your brain – and does not permit any ALTERNATIVE.
.
This leaves you with NO ASSURANCE that you can really know the truth – simply because you (just like James in our example above) have no way of knowing whether any PERCEPTION within your brain is TRUE or FALSE.
.
Take time to read this over as many times as you need – in order to really come to grips with it.
.
Blessings
br.d
Hi Jeff,
My reading of Calvinist (mostly John Calvin himself) leaves me to understand their doctrine to teach: 1) that God thought up and decreed that the vast majority of mankind (as individuals known by God) were to hate Him 2) that God thought up and decreed all men and women were to commit their specific sins exactly as he had thought them up before their creation and then 3) when they die, God thought up and decreed that they were to be unable to repent and instead they were to be damned to eternal conscience torment in hell. AND 4) all this for his good pleasure.
In your research, have you found any of the above to be in error?
If not in error, would we do well to sit back and let our brothers believe and teach other to believe this about our Lord?
I’m thinking we are called to contend against such teaching.
Blessings,
Larry
Larry: “If not in error, would we do well to sit back and let our brothers believe and teach other to believe this about our Lord? I’m thinking we are called to contend against such teaching.”
Amen to this! Unfortunately, Calvinists present their theology as “minor differences about second-level issues,” convincing people (and churches they’re trying to take over) that the differences between Calvinism and non-Calvinism are so minor that we shouldn’t fight over them, that we should all just agree to disagree and lovingly put our arms around each other and sing Kumbaya.
I think this is strategic, especially in stealth Calvinism. They’re trying to keep the opposition quiet as they take over non-Calvinist churches, convincing us that God wants us all to be joined in humble unity even if we have “minor disagreements” about “non-critical” things they teach.
But I think Calvinism hits at the very heart of God’s character and the gospel (salvation, Jesus’s sacrifice, faith) and it contradicts the plain teachings of the Bible. This makes their teachings not minor, secondary issues… but fundamental, critical issues which affect everything else we believe and which determine the way we read the Bible and if we take God at His Word.
And if the gospel, God’s character, Jesus’s sacrifice, salvation, and biblical truth are not worth fighting over, nothing is.
Calvinism is a slow poison that works from the inside out, rotting churches and people’s faith slowly over time, oftentimes without people’s awareness, until there’s nothing left to salvage at the end. This is why I think it’s so critical to fight against it now, before it spreads more, hurting more naive, trusting, vulnerable people and churches. (We recently lost our church to it.)
The more Calvinists present Calvinism as “the gospel/Christianity”, the harder it will be later to reclaim the true, pure teachings of God’s Word. Time is of the essence, and our silence and refusal to fight back only gives them more time and room to spread their unbiblical theology.
Personally, I think a lot of people who recently “left the faith” were trying to get away from Calvinism, not God. But since they were taught to believe that Calvinism IS the gospel, they didn’t know there was a difference. They didn’t know they could have just gotten rid of the Calvinism but kept the faith. Sad.
(For more on my look into stealth Calvinism, see my series on “The 9 marks of a Calvinist Cult” at anticalvinistrant.blogspot.com.)
God bless. Keep up the good fight. And happy 2024!
Hi Jeff! Serious question. Do you believe the “Bible hopelessly contradicts itself” on this theological choice of God pre-determining everything, even sin, or God sovereignly giving man free will to be able to sin and able to freely seek the light God gives everyone?
Jeff: “some people have even said that the Bible hopelessly contradicts itself on certain issues, with verses both for and against a certain viewpoint…”
Just because some people say it doesn’t mean it’s true. Usually what it means is that we haven’t yet figured out how to properly understand the verses that appear to contradict the others. And it’s usually because we haven’t taken the time and effort to research deeply enough or properly enough. Just my thought on this.
br.d
Here is something else for you to think about Jeff
.
Calvinism is a belief system which the Calvinist claims is divine.
.
But what do we do when a given belief system is logically or morally problematic?
What if we simply don’t want to give up that belief system even though it has the problems it has?
So we have a belief system which has problems – which we do not want to give up.
.
One of the arguments we could make – is that the problems are not *REAL* they are divine mysteries which we humans are incapable of grasping.
.
We are instructed to accept the belief system and ignore its problems.
.
if we are going to do that – then we must allow *ALL* others who have different belief systems to do the same.
.
For example – we may find logical and moral problems with the Jehovah’s Witness belief system.
Or we may find logical and moral problems with the Mormon’s belief system.
.
The Jehovah’s Witness can argue the logical and moral problems with his belief system are not *REAL* problems.
They are simply divine mysteries which the JW is to ignore and simply continue to embrace his belief system.
.
The Mormon can argue the logical and moral problems with his belief system are not *REAL* problems.
They are simply divine mysteries which the Mormon is to ignore and simply continue to embrace his belief system.
.
The Sun Myung Moon believer can argue the logical and moral problems with his belief system are not *REAL* problems. They are simply divine mysteries which he is to ignore and simply continue to embrace his belief system.
.
This argument – if used by a Calvinists – shows their belief system to have a serious weakness.
Because in order to justify continuing to embrace their belief system – they have to lower themselves to the same arguments used by Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and Moonies.
.
Any Bible Based Cult could easily rely on the same argument.
.
I could claim – the Bible teaches the earth is flat.
And you must believe it – and not question it – because it is a divine mystery beyond your grasp.
.
The Scripture tells us “The fool believes every word”
.
Any Calvinist teacher who is instructing you to simply believe Calvinism with its problems because it is a divine mystery or beyond your grasp – is asking you to play the fool.
.
Blessings
br.d
Br.d.: “Any Calvinist teacher who is instructing you to simply believe Calvinism with its problems because it is a divine mystery or beyond your grasp – is asking you to play the fool.”
Well said! Very succinct!
Yes, there are some true mysteries in the Bible (the end times, what God really looks like, the exact nature of the Trinity, etc.) but these are mysteries because God chose not to tell us all the details about them.
But Calvinism doesn’t teach true mysteries, things God didn’t reveal. Calvinism teaches things that contradict what God did clearly reveal in His Word (plain teachings of the Bible that can be and should be read in commonsense ways), making His Word unreliable and making God a two-faced, duplicitous, deceptive God.
But then to get out of a jam, they call their self-created contradictions “mysteries” and act like the problem is with us, as if we’re being prideful by refusing to submit to God’s sovereignty, by demanding to know things He doesn’t want to reveal to us, and by expecting Him to explain Himself to us lowly humans.
Calvinists first create the contradictions and problems, but then they blame us when we challenge them. They demand that we just sit back quietly and eat whatever they spoon-feed us without pushback or question… because we’re too human to understand.
I think demanding that people hand their sense-making and reasoning-skills over to someone else is very cult-like, like MacArthur saying that Alana should just keep her views to herself and not challenge him, one of the golden calves of Calvinism.
Nice. Well said Heather!
Yes, He leaves some things to mystery, but when He says, “I would have…if only you…..” hundreds of times in His Word He is doing that to tell us something!
I am confused. Everyone I hear says this is an in-house debate. How can that be. Calvinism is a different gospel, not obscuring the gospel in my opinion. How can they believe what they do and still be considered the true gospel?
Welcome Kay! Thank you for the question. Here is my take for what it is worth. 🙂
Calvinism, imo, has a deformed view of the true gospel, but still the true gospel.
Calvinism’s Gospel – God has provided salvation sufficiently for all and planned for it to be “freely” and irresistibly accepted by some.
NT Gospel – God has provided salvation sufficiently for all and planned and provided for all to be sufficiently enabled to freely seek it.
The bigger problem, imo, is that Calvinism must have God as the author of evil for their idea of reprobation to work. And reprobation is the logical outcome of believing the divine plan was that only some were to benefit from the offer of salvation. The gospel, to them, is not good news for everyone. And they admit it.
But they are professing the true gospel, but it is a deformed view of it, like looking at your real self in a warped mirror. So, we shouldn’t immediately think Calvinists are all unsaved. They would have to be if they believed in a false gospel, right?
I understand the view others have that Calvinists have a false gospel. And the ones who call Calvinism the gospel certainly should be called out for claiming a false gospel. But Calvinists still do invite each and every person to trust only in Jesus for salvation. Yes, they undermine that message later to harmful results in many, especially those who never were truly saved, but thought they were. I think that happens a lot because of infant baptism and childhood indoctrination into Calvinism without any true conversion experience.
Brian, In trying to think this out let me push you a bit. If a neo-Calvinism were to teach only elect men can be saved, even though God has sufficiently provided for women as well, would you consider this to be a false or a warped gospel? I think we both agree its a pretty horrific gospel : )
Thank you for the question, Larry! That hypothetical might force the intentions of the gospel to become part of the definition of the gospel. I understand the view that wants to force the intentions of the gospel to always be seen as part of the definition of the gospel, but then you will have to say that all Calvinists who firmly believe the gospel was to be proclaimed to all, and is sufficient for all, but is only intended for the elect are truly unsaved! Are you prepared to believe that? I’m not.
They believe the gospel. They just also believe the false teaching that the true gospel is not intended to be believed by everyone. That is certainly bad, false news that is related to the gospel, and it is harmful teaching that harms gospel ministry. But I do not see it as part of the gospel. Brian
br.d
Although many Calvinists do not find this aspect of the doctrine palatable – the Calvinist conception of the “Divine Potter of Romans 9” is of a THEOS who creates/designs individuals (THE MANY) specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure
.
John Calvin
-quote
by the eternal good pleasure of god though the reason does not appear they are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
In such case – the “Good News” of Christ dying for a given person – would not apply to an individual who has been created/designed specifically for the lake of fire.
.
This brings about – the contention concerning whether the offer of “Good News” for that individual is a “WELL MEANT” offer.
.
The NON-Calvinist concept of the offering of a gift – is such that if that gift is *REALLY NOT MEANT* for that recipient – then that offer cannot be construed as a “WELL MEANT” offer.
.
One common Calvinist argument is to shift the definition of “WELL MEANT”
A gift that is *NOT REALLY MEANT* for a given recipient when offered – can still constitute a “WELL MEANT” offer of that gift.
.
The whole thing eventually becomes a game of word-juggling and playing shell-games with definitions – in order to make an offer of salvation that is *NOT MEANT* for a given individual be treated *AS-IF* it was.
.
Thus the SHAPE-SHIFTING nature of Calvinism.
Brian,
Thank you for your reply! I greatly appreciate your wisdom. I apologize for the delay (and length) but the old man brain needed a few days to ponder. Also, please understand I don’t necessarily disagree with you, its just my personality to push the thinking to expose truth. And don’t feel obligated to read or reply.
First, If I understand correctly, you hold that the existence of saved Calvinist is proof the “Calvinist Gospel” is a true gospel (although warped). I certainly agree with you on there being saved Calvinist. My son for example came to faith in his youth in a non-Calvinist environment and later bought into J Piper Calvinism. Others in my current Calvinist take-over church are coming to faith in Jesus despite a hidden Calvinist teaching that God most likely does not want them. You don’t get the heavy/hard “Calvinist Truth” in Sunday morning service. Rather it comes in the nightly $350 “Institutes” course. In the case of our Church, God has apparently ordained from eternity past that our pastor often misspeak on Sunday mornings and present the true gospel message. This last Sunday, for example, ended with the statement regarding new life in Christ “the only way you can have this life is to admit I am a sinner”. God apparently ordained for pastor to get the ordo salutis mixed up allowing for totally depraved to admit their sin. Who knows, perhaps someone got saved at Storyline Arvada this week! : )
In thinking out your comment on forcing intentions upon the true gospel, would you agree that when someone does this, i.e. force intentions and then claims these to be part of the gospel (like Spurgeon’s “Calvinism is the Gospel”) they move into false gospel territory? Galatians false gospel of faith + circumcision seems to be in this realm. My hypothetical did possibly force an intention of “men only” into the “gospel message”. But, might the Calvinist gospel do the same when it claims “only a preselected group can get saved”?
A parable to help with my simplemindedness: A migrant family of 10 is trapped in a train box car dying of thirst. Texas border patrol cuts thru the concertina wire : ) bringing along a boat load of water. They open the box car door and ask me to present the good news of available water. I advise them with my crippled Spanish that there is sufficient water for two of the ten family members. They peek around me and see plenty of water upon which, the entire family runs out for salvation water.
In my parable, I would understand my good news to them to be partly true yet also false, and yet salvation still plays out. My intentions for the false gospel may have been good (bad Spanish perhaps) or bad (a hatred of immigrants) yet either way I gave an erroneous message of salvation which was enough to assist in the salvation. Rambling too much here but to conclude, I’m thinking that the gospel, although critical, does not save, it just points. And sometimes even with a bad or a false one, the Holy Spirit is quite capable of fulfilling the goal.
Larry, and Brian…and Heather,
Yesterday, and today, you guys really surprized me with agreeing with the following:
“Calvinist Gospel” is a true gospel (although warped).
Calvinism, in my view, is the most dangerous, and abusive sect of cults that I have ever witnessed in my life. About 15 years ago, I DISCOVERED Calvinism, not even knowing what it was yet, through Spiritual Abuse Blogs. The doctrines that I heard are doctrines that I had never ever heard of before. And the abuse that I read completely disgusted me.
And now, to read that from all of you guys…it puts a sour taste in my mouth.
I do know that in a couple of places on this blog site, that I had posted a letter that Thomas Jefferson had written about his thoughts on Calvinism.
“I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did. The being described in his 5 points is not the god whom you and I acknowledge and adore, the Creator and benevolent and governor of the world, but a daemon of malignant spirit. It would be more pardonable to believe in no god at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin.”
—Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823.
I agree.
Satan himself TOLD THE TRUTH, mixed with WARP.
Genesis 3:5 (SATAN SPEAKING)
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Genesis 3:22 (GOD SPEAKING)
22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:
Satan, in the tempting of Jesus quoted scripture correctly. But Jesus countered with other scripture.
2 Corinthians 11:14
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9
As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
I would assume that would include warped gospels.
Ed Chapman
quote
his religion was Daemonism….
.
br.d
Some interesting things to note about this particular word:
.
The Ancient Greek: δαίμων, pronounced daimon or daemon (meaning “god”, “godlike”, “power”, “fate”)
The word is derived from Proto-Indo-European daimon “provider, divider (of fortunes or destinies),” from the root *da- “to divide”
.
THE GNOSTIC DAIMONS OF GOOD AND EVIL
In the ancient system of Gnosticism which thrived in Augustine’s day – Daimons were both Good and Evil.
.
Many pagan religions have god’s who appear in the form or TWINS
Twins were often cast as two halves of the same whole or as rivals
One as “Good” and the other as “Evil”.
.
The gods Apollo and Artemis are twins.
The god Pan appeared in either a benevolent, or malevolent form.
In Hinduism, the Ashwini Twins or Ashvins are the Healers who are also offered sacrificial offerings or oblations as per the Rig Veda.
.
In Xingu mythology of Brazil, the twin brothers Kuat and Iae forced the evil king Urubutsin to give light to the world, and Kuat became the sun with Iae as the moon.
.
The Egyptian creation story included the earth god Geb and the sky goddess Nut, who were twins.
.
Thus – pagan gods are DUALISTIC:
When a DUALISTIC (“Good” – “Evil”) cosmology and a NeoPlatonic view of God, are synchronized with the monotheistic God of Christianity, what will appear is an immutable God whose relationship to good and evil are utilitarian.
Calvin’s gospel…
Jesus died for the elect only…he didn’t die for everyone. Neener, neener, neener…I’m saved, your not, God decided before you were born that you are going to burn for eternity…and you can’t blame God, either…it’s all your fault.
Now, tell me how that is good news,…anyone?
Thank you Larry for your thoughtful reply. As I think I said before, a Calvinist who says Calvinism is the Gospel does need to be confronted, for they are either lying, probably ignorantly, or they are preaching a false gospel and would believe rejection of Calvinism means a person is unsaved.
Your illustration is cute, but almost no Calvinist preaches the gospel that way, because they hide behind their argument that they don’t know who the elect are. But they should be challenged as to why would it matter if they told each person that the probability is that Jesus’ atonement wasn’t meant for them. If the person is elect, nothing will delay their regeneration, and if reprobate, nothing could make them more lost!
Yes, truly saved Calvinist preachers leak out the truth, because the Holy Spirit often overrides their thinking, and also they have gotten used to believing contradictions are true. So I still think they teach the true gospel, but have deformed it with their harmful theology.
Larry,
I say often that Calvinists and Universalists (who they despise) are almost exactly the same.
They both believe that God has chosen people that He will force into believing in the sacrificial blood of Christ.
They only differ in the number!!
Ed, thanks for your thoughts, but let me clarify my position as succinctly as possible.
Calvinism, in my estimation, is not just a warped version of the true gospel. It’s a deception, presenting the true gospel but only as a way to sucker people into their deeper unbiblical layers. It’s a false gospel on the whole, covered in the deceptive veneer of the true gospel. It teaches the true gospel on the surface, but there are so many unbiblical teachings underneath which alter/contradict/negate the biblical surface teachings… and consequently, it has to be taken as false gospel on the whole, even if they do say some good biblical things now and then, on the surface.
So, no, I do not say that the “Calvinism gospel” is the true gospel. It is a corruption of the true gospel. A wolf in sheep’s clothing. They share the true gospel on the surface but mean something very different underneath, which makes it deception and half-truths, very similar to how Satan best operates, in my opinion.
I go so far on my blog as to call it heresy. And I recently wrote a series about the deceptive, cult-like tactics it uses to trap people. So I totally agree with you when you say: “Calvinism, in my view, is the most dangerous, and abusive sect of cults that I have ever witnessed in my life.”
I think it’s one of the biggest, most seductive and sinister threats to the evangelical church, which is why we need to mince no words about condemning it as such (and it’s why I call their god Calvi-god, to differentiate him from the God of the Bible), even if I have to admit that they do (deceptively, disingenuously) share the true gospel on the surface in their hopes that they can sucker naive people into it.
I hope that’s clear enough. God bless.
Heather,
Well, when you put it that way…lol. Yes, I agree with what you have said here.
However, the SBC has no problem with Calvinism in their ranks/midst/congregations, which is where the problem in spiritual abuse takes place, when you read the spiritual abuse blogs that flourished about a decade ago. The internet really exposed the abuse that was hidden for so many years. You generally don’t find Calvinists in a Church of Christ, Aiden’s denomination. Not in Pentecostal church’s, etc. But the Baptists really love these guys for some reason.
They take Matthew 18, for example, as a means to forgive the perp, but kick out the victim, calling Matthew 18 the DISCIPLINE chapter, when I don’t even see DISCIPLINE as any part of Matthew 18 at all. And do you know who plays judge and jury for this so-called discipline? Pasters/Elders, when it is clear that it’s the congregation’s responsibility to KICK a person out, not the leaders. And they take the word “witness” to mean people to confront the accused to repent, that didn’t even “WITNESS” the sin. And now look at what mess that the SBC is in with lawsuits from the government, etc. over the sexual abuse from the leaders!
NOTE: I was in the US Navy…I know what discipline is. Kicking a person out is not discipline. Discipline is for those who you keep, to CORRECT a deficiency.
SBC is complicit in the spiritual abuse, because of cover-ups, because they abused the true nature of Matthew 18, which means that witnesses must be witnesses of the sin, for one, and if no witnesses of the sin, then it stops right there in its tracks. And no one should be discouraged from calling 9-1-1 to file a police report, and let the authorities do the investigating. And the ONLY one who has the authority to forgive is the VICTIM, not the church, not the pastor, not the elders. That’s what Catholics do, and we don’t believe that priests can forgive sins…unless they are the victim. So why does the church think that they can corporately forgive, when they were never the victim?
Why am I rambling about Matthew 18? Because Calvinists don’t even LIVE the gospel. They twist the scriptures so-much so that it causes good people to become atheists. Some used Homeschooling as a means to abuse the family. Men have AUTHORITY to practically do anything they wanted, and the woman is to shut her mouth, and take the abuse, and she can never ever get a divorce. Girls were strongly told, DON’T GO TO COLLEGE! Marry and have TONS of babies, calling them babies the KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH!
Sounds like Islam, not Christianity.
So it goes a lot deeper than just “Christ died on a cross to forgive the elects sins, and rose from the dead on the third day”, which is a FALSE gospel in that statement alone. Delete the word “the elect”, and maybe we can give a little latitude.
I don’t see the LOVE OF JESUS in them. And, by the way, Satan is just an EMPLOYEE of God! There is just a LOT that they get wrong. How to LIVE like a Christian…you know them by their fruits. What fruit have they brought to the dinner table?
Ed Chapman
Hello Kay,
i definitely appreciate your honest opinion and post. i do trust Brian knows far more than i do. –Though i too see it as a false gospel as well!! But I’m learning to trust not all who hold to it understand the horrible implications and the distortion it does to our Holy God and how it places Him in box.. I find it curious that I’ve heard of leading calvinist describing it as an itchy blanket or crying for days when they excepted it as truth…. How bizarre indeed!!! There is no fear or dead in love and we are told He is love.. but even this attribute gets twisted by others.. just a thought,
—maybe if someone is trusting man above God the Word gets obscure (void of light), & to me that is why i find calvinism so dangerous… though they claim we are man centered bowing at the altar of free will, so odd they don’t see the flip side EDD (though some do and are at peace with it ie.. placing God not only as the author of all sin, but clearly in a box and not as Amazing as He truly is!!!)… It also seems once someone adheres to this they either avoid a non-calvinist or they adamantly fight for their system. Ugh i soooooo dislike calvinism!!!
Thank you for your post🌻
Hello Kay and welcome
There is a very unfortunate aspect to Calvinism which follows the pattern that we seen within Islamic patterns
That pattern is to plead for unity or acceptance in order to obtain a foot-hold
And once the foot-hold is obtained – then that pleading for unity changes to aggressive attacks
The pleading for unity was a ruse in order to gain the foot-hold
The hidden strategy is domination.
.
Calvinists calling the conflict between themselves and other Christians an “in-house debate” is part of that ruse
The argument is used during the “pleading for unity” phase
.
As soon as the foot-hold is obtained – the “in-house debate” will transform into attacks against what they claim is the gospel.
.
As soon as they have a foot-hold in any platform – they themselves will declare their system the ONLY TRUTH gospel.
So you are correct – and are moving in wisdom.
.
br.d
Brdmod: “Calvinists calling the conflict between themselves and other Christians an “in-house debate” is part of that ruse. The argument is used during the “pleading for unity” phase. As soon as the foot-hold is obtained – the “in-house debate” will transform into attacks against what they claim is the gospel. As soon as they have a foot-hold in any platform – they themselves will declare their system the ONLY TRUTH gospel.”
Very well said! Very well!
Calvinists constantly claim that the debate over Calvinism is merely about the “finer points” and “secondary, non-core issues.” And they cry for unity: “Let’s not divide over these finer points. God wants us all to be unified!”
But they don’t do this because they want to compromise with us, tolerate us, or “agree to disagree.” They do it to take over, to dominate, to get is to let our guards down and keep our mouths shut. And so our tolerance of them and compromising with them only gives them more room and time to dominate, to replace all non-Calvinism with Calvinism. Or as they call it: “THE gospel”. And so if we acquiesce to them by also calling it “the true gospel,” we’re only helping them, giving them more legitimacy than Calvinism deserves, and confusing the issue for everyone. Just my two cents. God bless!
br.d
Yes! Well said Heather!
.
Isaiah 59:8
The way of peace they do not know.
There is no justice in their paths.
They have turned them into crooked roads.
No one who walks along them will know peace.
.
The way we know Calvinism’s road is a crooked road – is by observing the characteristics of its language.
.
It is a language of obfuscation
It is a cosmetic language – designed to hide the dark things on the face of the doctrine
And to paint over those things with SEMANTIC masks in order to produce an acceptable appearance.
.
Misleading language is its predominant mode of language.
Misleading language is crooked language which follows a crooked path.
.
Calvinism’s language should be a red-flag to anyone who is a true follower of Jesus.
Kay, I agree with you that Calvinism is a different gospel. And I agree with Brian that Calvinism does teach the true gospel… but the thing is, I believe it only teaches the true gospel on the surface layer. But when we dig past that surface layer, there’s so much false teachings underneath that it contradicts the biblical surface layer, making it deserving of being considered a “false gospel” on the whole.
Just because something has a biblical surface layer doesn’t make it truly biblical on the whole. It’s the deeper layers – the things they REALLY believe at the heart of it all – that determine if it’s truly biblical or not. If we were to judge the biblical-ness of a theology on whether or not they say salvation comes through Jesus, then we would have to say that the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons share the true gospel too. So when is there enough error in a theology – despite the few good things they say on the surface – for it to be resisted as a false gospel, instead of tolerated and compromised with?
I believe Calvinism’s god and Calvinism’s Jesus and Calvinism’s faith and Calvinism’s path to salvation are very different from the Bible’s views of these things. They might appear the same on the surface – because of Calvinism’s many layers – but at the heart of it, they are very different. So different … and so damaging … that Calvinism cannot be considered biblical truth on the whole, even if it has lots of true things on the surface.
This is something I wrote in an earlier comment on this post:
“Personally, and maybe this is just me, but I do say that Calvinism is a false gospel and that it severely damages God’s character, His Word, Jesus’s sacrifice, and people’s ability to be saved.
I believe the Bible says that God truly loves all people, that Jesus died for all sins of all people, that salvation is truly offered to all people, that God is not responsible for evil or sins or unbelief, and that the one “work” we must do to be saved is to believe in Jesus (it is our responsibility, and all people have the option/ability to do it).
But this is the opposite of what Calvinism teaches (underneath all the deceptive layers they use to obscure it), which is that God only really loved the elect enough to save them, that Jesus only died for the elect, that salvation is only truly offered to the elect, that God is the ultimate (and essentially only) cause of sin, evil, and unbelief (but He punishes us for it), and that we cannot believe in Jesus unless and until God makes us do it.
These are opposing messages, opposing gospels. And so I have to call Calvinism a false gospel. It has a different idea of who God is, how God works, how salvation happens, who Jesus died for, who’s responsible for evil, etc.
If God says we have to believe in Jesus to be saved (that it’s our responsibility and choice), but Calvinism says we cannot believe in Jesus (that it’s not our responsibility or choice), then how can anyone be saved under Calvinism?
Calvinism attacks the very heart of salvation and God’s character, which is an attack on the gospel.
And I think one of the biggest dangers of Calvinism is that it presents itself as the true gospel, as biblical truth. And so if people can tell there’s something wrong with it, they don’t end up just rejecting the Calvinism but they reject the Bible, God, the gospel. Because they think they are one and the same. (This has happened recently to several well-known Christians who left the faith. But if they had known that Calvinism was not biblical truth, maybe they would’ve know enough to reject the Calvinism but keep faith in God.)
It’s because Calvinists are so deceptive, stealthily infiltrating churches and replacing the truth of the Bible and leading many people astray, that I feel it’s all the more critical to take a very firm stance against Calvinism, to call it out for the false gospel it is. If we are overly gentle or tolerant or hazy about it, if we try to make it seem like our different versions can coexist just fine, then we’ll just be helping to confuse people, allowing Calvinism to sneak in and do its damage behind the scenes and in the long run.
I agree with Kevin Thompson from Beyond the Fundamentals who calls Calvinism a cancer that needs to be cut out from the church. We can be and should be nice and kind and tolerant towards the people, but not towards the theology itself. This is just my two cents on it. God bless, everyone.”
I got a little pushback for this comment from other non-Calvinists, but I stand by it. I try my best to be gracious to Calvinist people (the ones we know are wonderful, godly people – truly wonderful!), but I take a very firm stand against the theology. And I don’t think it does any favors to anyone or any good for the true Gospel, for God’s character, or for people’s faith to compromise with Calvinism, to be soft on it or accommodating with it. I do not think a biblical surface layer equals a biblical theology. I do not think that Calvinism’s surface layer of “we need to have faith in Jesus to be saved” is enough to make it truly biblical, not when their idea of “faith” and Jesus’s death and how we are saved differs wildly from the Bible. Same words, sure, but very different definitions. (And that’s how cults and corrupt leaders often take over and operate: same words, but hidden, different definitions.)
And so at what point are the errors in a theology enough to deem it “false” instead of merely distorted?
Personally, for me, when a theology completely changes the character of God, the definition of faith, the way people are saved, the work of the Holy Spirit, the intended effect of Jesus’s sacrificial death, etc., then it is enough error to call it a false gospel. As Calvinism does and is.
And sadly, the fact that Calvinism has such a biblical surface layer is what’s so dangerous about it. Satan works best through deception and small subtle attacks on God’s character and small subtle tweaks to God’s Word, not through outright lies and attacks on God’s character and God’s Word which we would all stand against. This is why Calvinism sneaks in so well and so unopposed, because they say the right things on one level… while hiding (and slowly reeling us into) the deeper, unbiblical levels. And so if we don’t nip it in the bud – if we tolerate it and allow it to grow and spread in the church because of its biblical surface layer – then we are only helping a destructive theology take over and crowd out biblical truth. And I can’t be part of that. So I will take a strong stand against it, despite the good things it says.
And to Brian: You said “Calvinism’s Gospel – God has provided salvation sufficiently for all and planned for it to be “freely” and irresistibly accepted by some.”
Does Calvinism’s god really provide salvation for all? (Or is this just what they want us to think?) What’s “sufficient” about it if Jesus never even died for the non-elect and if God made it impossible for them to believe?
If Calvinism’s god doesn’t truly provide salvation for all but the God of the Bible does, can Calvinism really be considered truth, at the heart of it all? And if Calvinism’s god is truly the author of evil but the God of the Bible isn’t, are these truly the same God? If Calvinism has a different God and a different way to salvation and different results of Jesus’s sacrificial death, can it truly be considered the true gospel? How much deep, fundamental error will it take to finally deserve the label “unbiblical”?
Personally, I think your (Brian) heart is in the right place (concerned for those trapped in Calvinism and not wanting to hurt them) but I think you’re incorrectly thinking that if we say Calvinism is a false gospel then we’re saying no Calvinist is saved. As you said: “So, we shouldn’t immediately think Calvinists are all unsaved. They would have to be if they believed in a false gospel, right?” But Kay never said that, nor do I.
As I’ve said before, Calvinism has a biblical surface layer (the layer it uses to trap people and to get them to put their guard down)… and through this biblical surface layer, many people can still find Christ and salvation and the true gospel in it, because they are unaware yet of the unbiblical layers, the unbiblical foundational beliefs of Calvinism that they have to be educated into.
Yes, I agree with you that Calvinists “believe the gospel” (because it has a biblical surface layer and lots of good things to say), but just because they have a biblical surface layer and just because people can still find Jesus through it doesn’t make the theology itself biblical. It just means people can still find Jesus in it despite its deeper, unbiblical teachings. (It would be like someone going to a Jehovah’s Witness church and hearing about the need to believe in Jesus to be saved, and so they believe in Jesus… unaware that the theology itself is unbiblical overall.)
Not to mention that Calvinism is usually about taking over non-Calvinist churches, about converting those who are already Christians to Calvinism. And so, yes, many Calvinists are true believers… and many people can still find the true gospel in it, in the surface layer… but this does not make Calvinism a true, biblical gospel on the whole. And I judge it more based on what it is “on the whole” than what its surface layer is.
Personally, I think it’s more damaging to the Church and biblical truth to be too soft on Calvinism, too compromising with it, than it is to take a firm, clear, mincing-no-words stand against it. (Yet we still need to be loving and gentle with the people, of course, with those who are trapped in it and who are just doing their best to be good, humble, God-honoring Christians as best they know how. It’s not the people I have a problem with; it’s the theology.)
God bless! And please take what I say only worth a grain of salt. It’s just my opinion based on my experience with our church being taken over by Calvinism. God bless!
Heather, thank you for your deep and thoughtful response. This is definitely an issue with quite a bit of nuance that can’t just be addressed in a couple of sentences. I very much agree with the way you’ve laid it out here.
When we were in an ultra-Calvinist church for 10 years, the pure, simple, gospel was presented many times. Never mind that quite often it completely contradicted the Calvinistic sermon that the pastor just spent 45 minutes preaching (in his invitation he would use words like I implore you, I urge you, etc.). I was actually glad that he was grossly inconsistent and contradictory with the Calvinism he preached when presenting the gospel. Most non-believer would not even pick up on the contradictions. So what is preached most of the time is the top layer simple gospel, which is a good thing as far as the gospel being preached. If his invitation to salvation to unbelievers was actually consistent with what he preached in his sermons, including the “calvinistic gospel” (ie. that Jesus probably didn’t die for them, that they don’t have the ability to repent and believe, that they just need to sit around and wait to see if they are one of the elect and for God to “regenerate” them) then I would had a big problem with that false gospel being presented to non-believers.
As far as salvation is concerned, I’ve said many times and it’s still true in my experience, I’ve not ever met, known, or read of one single instance of a Calvinist who was a Calvinist when they became a Christian or who became a Calvinist simply by reading the Bible shortly after he became a Christian. Every one of them became a Christian through the hearing of the true gospel and repenting and believing. They then became a Calvinist sometime later not from reading the Bible, but when they were taught it by other people either through Calvinist preaching, Calvinist books, or Calvinist friends and then overlaid that Calvinism on top of the Bible.
So what you almost always hear preached or taught or presented to an unbeliever on the surface from a Calvinist is nearly always the true gospel. But what you hear from them when they tell you the deeper theology they believe in is a different and false gospel.
Andy
So what you almost always hear preached or taught or presented to an unbeliever on the surface from a Calvinist is nearly always the true gospel. But what you hear from them when they tell you the deeper theology they believe in is a different and false gospel.
.
br.d
What you are observing there – is the presentation of a “Gospel” which the Calvinist calculates people will accept.
.
And this is of great concern to Dr. Flowers – because of the degree to which Calvinists evade being honest – and people are being mislead.
.
If you watch Dr. Flower’s Youtube videos – you will quite frequently see how he will play a video clip of a John Piper or a John MacArthur…etc making statements which are highly misleading or completely inconsistent.
.
The reason Dr. Flowers plays those clips – is to expose the misleading nature and the inconsistency.
.
Calvinist statements – follow a consistent pattern of *LIES OF OMISSION*
.
A lie of omission – is communication designed to mislead – by strategically omitting critical facts – which if not omitted would not mislead.
.
The term “Gospel” in the Greek is defined as “Good News”
.
Calvin’s god per the doctrine – creates and designs the vast majority of individuals within the total human population – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire for his good pleasure.
.
Creating people specifically for eternal torment – is Calvin’s god’s provision for THE MANY
And thus his PRIMARY provision for mankind
.
His SECONDARY provision is for the FEW
To save a FEW from his PRIMARY provision.
.
Those two provisions for mankind and salvation are the Calvinist “Gospel”
Creating people specifically for eternal torment is also a part of the Calvinist definition for “Grace”.
.
Calvin’s god also creates a large percentage of believers for eternal torment – divinely deceiving them by giving them a FALSE SENSE of salvation. These believers will eventually wake up in the lake of fire. And at that time realize they were created as CHAFF believers
.
Calvinists are extremely aware they cannot TELL THE TRUTH to people.
Because they know people are going to see their “Gospel” and their “Grace” as evil
They know people will reject it
.
So yes – your point is correct – Calvinists will present a “Gospel” they calculate people will accept.
.
The process requires the Calvinist paint a cosmetic mask over the face of his “Gospel” in order to get people to accept it.
Thank you Heather for your thoughtful reply. You will need to work through, imo, the conflicting idea, imo, that people who strongly believe a false gospel can be called by you as “wonderful godly people, truly wonderful” and yet not be lost!
Brian, I understand what you’re saying: “You will need to work through, imo, the conflicting idea, imo, that people who strongly believe a false gospel can be called by you as “wonderful godly people, truly wonderful” and yet not be lost!”
And I appreciate your perspective and challenge. I know it’s a messy topic. And Andy said it well: “This is definitely an issue with quite a bit of nuance that can’t just be addressed in a couple of sentences.” And so while it might be clear in my head, it’s harder to get across. (And you’ll have to excuse my lengthy, blathering replies. It’s not necessarily directed to you, but I am just trying to explain myself more clearly, trying to be careful because this is such a serious, sensitive topic.)
But for me, I guess it comes down to the difference between the conflicting layers of Calvinism, and what we should do with Calvinism on the whole. Calvinism has a biblical surface layer (where we find the true gospel which can and does save many people) but it also has a deeper layer (their true beliefs which contradict/alter/negate the surface layer). That’s why I say I agree with you (they have the gospel) and yet agree with Kay (they ultimately are a false gospel when taken as a whole). Calvinism has two conflicting layers, and I am judging it based on the whole thing, instead of just the biblical surface layer.
It’s like a two-layered cake: vanilla on the outside, chocolate on the inside. If we look at the cake without cutting into it, we’d say it’s a vanilla cake. And we would be correct to a degree, on one level. It IS a vanilla cake… but it’s not JUST a vanilla cake. There’s more to it than meets the eye. And it takes digging into it to realize it.
Calvinism has the biblical truth in the surface layer, but it has a deeper layer which changes what the cake is, on the whole. It’s no longer just a truth-filled cake. It’s now a truth-coated cake filled with unbiblical teachings. And the unbiblical layer is so huge and damaging and it alters/negates the surface layer so much that the whole thing can no longer be taken as pure, biblical truth (at least in my opinion).
Calvinists themselves equate Calvinism with “the gospel.” And so if we affirm their gospel, then we appear to affirm Calvinism on the whole. I can give credit to them for having the gospel and biblical truth on the surface, but not on the whole. And if that surface layer is really just there to trap people and reel them into the deeper unbiblical layer, then I’d be doing no great service to the Church or the Truth or God’s Word to give them credit for their biblical surface layer. I’d be merely helping them spread their unbiblical theology through their deceptive tactics.
The thing is, Calvinism wants us to take it face value. It wants us to think that when they say “God loves sinners and Jesus died for sinners and we need to believe in Jesus to be saved” that they really mean that God loves all sinners (all people), that Jesus died for all people, and that we all have the chance and ability to believe in Jesus and be saved, that it’s our choice.
That’s what they want us to think they really mean so that they don’t alarm us, buying them time to reel people deeper into Calvinism. And of course, this surface layer can reach and save a lot of people… because most people don’t realize what’s hiding underneath. (But when they do learn the deeper layer after becoming saved through the surface layer, it often messes up their faith and their trust in God severely.)
I don’t think Calvinism should be taken at face value or should be given credit for having a biblical surface layer… not when that layer is there to trap people and when it’s contradicted by the deeper layer.
If we dig past the surface layer (and I know I don’t need to explain this to you, Brian, because you are far more intelligent and educated than I am, but I’m just saying it to explain myself more fully), we discover that they don’t really mean what they said the way they said it at first. What they really mean is “God determined your sins and has already determined whether you will believe in Him or not; He either causes you to believe or causes you to reject Him and there’s nothing you can do about it; He loves only the elect enough to save them; Jesus didn’t die for the non-elect and so the non-elect have no chance or ability to believe and be saved”.
This is far different than what they wanted you to think they meant at first. And I think it’s deceptive enough and damaging enough that it should be called out and condemned, not encouraged by giving them credit for having a biblical surface layer. (I know I’m harsh, but I don’t think it’s helpful to those trapped in Calvinism – or who might be sucked into Calvinism – to be overly gentle about Calvinism, not when it’s so sneaky and deliberate in its deceptive tactics.)
Calvinism cannot and should not be taken at face value because they don’t really mean things the way they first say them.
In my mind, the true biblical gospel boils down to “Believe in Jesus and you will be saved.” And Calvinists want you to think, at first, that this is what they believe too. But what they really believe is “You’ll believe in Jesus IF you are saved.” They make it sound like they mean “We’re saved because we believe,” but what they really mean is “We believe because we’re saved.” As Calvinist Loraine Boettner says in The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination: “A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved.”
But Scripture says “believe and be saved” not “you’ll believe because you are saved”:
“… Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31)
“That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved…” (Mark 16:16)
“Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12)
Calvinism, at the heart of it all, cannot be the same gospel as the Bible, the same way to salvation – not when they reverse the order of belief and being saved, reversing which leads to which.
And so yes, Calvinists have the true gospel on the surface if we take them at face value. And this is why many people can be saved in Calvinism. But it’s IN SPITE of Calvinism, not because of it. Thankfully, many people aren’t aware of the deeper unbiblical layer of Calvinism until after they become believers, which is why they can be saved with the surface layer.
But sadly, it’s because people aren’t aware of the deeper layer that Calvinism spreads so easily and is succeeding in flipping the gospel and biblical truth on its head.
Anyway, thanks for your reply, Brian. I do like to be challenged in things like these so that I can deeply consider what I am saying/thinking and if I am being fair enough to the other side. I might not often come across with an attitude of fairness and gentleness and respect, but I do try to have fair beliefs and views of it. And I am working on my attitude, on being more gentle (it’s been a process for me since we lost our church of 20 years over this issue, our friends, our whole social circle, our dreams for our kids and their futures, etc.). God bless!
Thank you Heather for your reply… But to be honest, I only see it as a fuller explanation of your position without directly addressing my comment. Let me rephrase my last comment as a direct question.
Do you really believe the Calvinists whom you know as “wonderful godly people, truly wonderful”, and I’m assuming they believe firmly in Calvinism, which you call a false gospel, are truly saved while believing a false gospel? In other words, can someone get saved with the true gospel, become nice Christians, and believe fully and support fully the teaching of a false gospel, denying the true gospel.
I personally don’t, and would consider them not yet saved, no matter how godly they might seem, if indeed Calvinism is a false gospel. I would think the same of those who professed to be at one time evangelicals, but now believe and teach Roman Catholicism’s salvation from sin through sacramental grace and proxy faith.
I hope that clarifies what I’m wanting you to consider. 😃
Andy: “They then became a Calvinist sometime later not from reading the Bible, but when they were taught it by other people either through Calvinist preaching, Calvinist books, or Calvinist friends and then overlaid that Calvinism on top of the Bible. So what you almost always hear preached or taught or presented to an unbeliever on the surface from a Calvinist is nearly always the true gospel. But what you hear from them when they tell you the deeper theology they believe in is a different and false gospel.”
Yes! Absolutely, I agree. This is why many Calvinists are true Christians. They were Christians first, then Calvinists… or they heard the surface-layer true gospel and believed it and then were educated into the deeper unbiblical layers.
Sadly, it got to the point at our church where I couldn’t stomach anymore even the good things the Calvinist pastor said when he was trying to SOUND non-Calvinist… because even though I agreed with what he said on the surface, I knew what he really meant underneath and how deliberately deceptive he was being in how he presented his beliefs. Thankfully, most people didn’t know what he really meant and so they could probably get a lot of good teaching from it.
But since this is also how it spreads so easily and slyly, I am now at the point where I wish they would just be upfront with their terrible beliefs, just tear off the non-Calvinist-sounding surface layer and say what they really mean, warts and all, which our pastor has done a few times here and there “God doesn’t love everyone. He chose some for eternal life and the rest for damnation…. Jesus died only for HIS people… God controls the devil… God ordained your childhood abuse for His glory and to humble you…. Even babies are born rebellious, God-hating, wicked sinners. No one gets a free pass to heaven. Everyone needs to repent, and if they don’t, they don’t go to heaven.”
It would sound terrible if they were upfront with their true beliefs, but at least we’d know what they really believe and they couldn’t sucker naive, well-meaning people in with cult-like tactics and carefully-worded deceptions.
Thanks for your comment, Andy. God bless!
Hey guys,
I realize this “Are they Christians?” has been discussed a lot (and I’m late to the party), but a few thoughts here.
One of the themes in our house and our ministry is, “Remember: Everybody’s thing is the best thing.” Since we are in ministry and in a leadership position, we get lots of people approaching us with the silver bullet…best thing ever.
We non-Calvinist can fall for that too. Our way is right and all else is not Gospel.
Go to a Calvinist site. Many of them think the same thing about us!!
I have never met a Calvinist (of course outside of those raised in a Calvinist denomination) who was not a Christian for quite some time before becoming a Calvinisty. One national pastoral colleague was a believer for 40 years!! He even said to me —in the language of the country where we served 30 years— that he was so happy “since he discovered Calvinism” (via his 20-something, online-scouring, book-reading son of course). Discovered!? Where was it hiding!?
Anyway…my point is simple. He now believes in what some on this site would call a “false doctrine” and he is “therefore not saved.” So he was not saved those 40 years or did he lose his salvation cuz he is now following a false doctrine?
It is actually very similar with some of the big guns like Piper and MacArthur. They both moved to Calvinism after many years (and books) under their ministry belt.
So…IMHO we cannot say it is a “different Gospel” any more than they should say it about us.
br.d
Hey FOH great to hear from you!!!!
I hope this finds you and yours well!
.
I personally don’t make judgments or declarations about any Calvinists being saved or not.
.
However – I think you will have to acknowledge – what Calvinism calls “Good News” is not what NORMAL people would call “Good News”.
.
Creating the vast majority of human individuals within the total human population – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for one’s good pleasure – I don’t believe NORMAL people would call that “Good News”
.
Since that is the case – I can’t see how it could be rational to identify the Calvinist “Gospel” as the NON-Calvinist has.
.
The NON-Calvinist “Gospel” is a message in which people are granted ALTERNATIVES from which to choose – in regard to whether they will [SIN] or [NOT SIN] at any given instance.
.
In Calvinism – an infallible decree determines whether you will [SIN] or [NOT SIN] at any given moment.
And an infallible decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from what it decrees
So if it is decreed that you will perform SIN_X at TIME-T – then that event is granted existence
And the option to NOT perform SIN_X at TIME-T is NOT granted existence.
.
On the subject of whether one should call a Calvinist saved or not.
Calvinism’s doctrine (if the Calvinist is TRUE to his doctrine) does not permit him to identify anyone as elect
The elect are a divine secret which only Calvin’s god knows
.
Additionally – Calvin’s god creates a large percentage of believers as CHAFF believers
He divinely deceives them with a FALSE SENSE of salvation.
These Calvinists will go through their whole lives having a constant stream of FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation
And eventually wake up in the lake of fire
And at that time realize what they were created for.
.
So if a Calvinist is going to be TRUTHFUL he cannot call anyone his brother or his sister in the Lord
Most Calvinists simply are NOT TRUTHFUL in this regard.
They automatically assume they are automatically ELECT
.
The Calvinist should not expect anyone who understands the doctrine assume the Calvinist is elect simply because the Calvinists own doctrine forbids it.
.
Blessings!
br.d :-]
br.d
I’m not planning to go on much with this. Just a few remarks here.
You could easily find in these pages the MANY times that I have said that the Calvinist message is not “good news.”
Much of what you say…..”Creating the vast majority of human individuals…. specifically for eternal torment…..for one’s good pleasure….” has been stated by me dozens of times on these pages.
The point that you make so many times (as do I) about the end result of Calvinism (or theistic determinism) being robotic non-choice is correct….but that is the “logical end” or “where this all leads” discussion that the vast, vast majority of average Calvinist dont know about or (contradictorily) reject.
With that said, the theistic determinist (of all decisions on all days by all people) is not the Gospel.
The Gospel is simple.
John 3:16“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Acts 4:12And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
John 14:6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
On this one main idea all Calvinists and non-Calvinist would agree.
Even your next idea of “does not permit him to identify anyone as elect” is not the Gospel.
Calvin’s idea of a false sense of salvation is (1) not known by the vast, vast majority of Calvinists and (2) not part of the Gospel discussion.
What saves? Exclusive belief in the sacrificial death of a divine Christ.
In my opinion 100% of Calvinists I know would agree with that.
All other points —- even though they are a logical end of their camp’s philosophical position —- are peripheral.
In the same way, say, Free Methodists, would agree with the “Exclusive belief in the sacrificial death of a divine Christ,” but they say it is a continual belief. Stopping believing would shipwreck their faith (to quote Paul). But they, unlike Calvinists, believe that they can stop believing.
Does that mean that if we think that Free Methodists (Nazarenes, Pentecostals, etc) are wrong on this point they preach another gospel?
Again…Everybody’s thing is the best thing.
br.d
Nicely said FOH!
.
One comment on one point.
Calvin’s idea of a false sense of salvation is (1) not known by the vast, vast majority of Calvinists and (2) not part of the Gospel discussion.
.
Both of those are totally understandable because the Calvinist does not want to face this aspect of his doctrine.
.
Calvinism is – as we both know – predominantly a doctrine of divine malevolence.
.
Calvinists want to LABEL it a “Doctrine of Grace” for emotional reasons.
They simply do not want to face a truth about the doctrine which I’m sure would terrify them.
.
However – Calvin’s description of a FALSE SENSE of salvation is 100% consistent.
.
Take for example a Jehovah’s Witness interpretation of scripture when he reads it.
If you ask any Calvinist – if the Jehovah’s Witness interpretation of scripture is accurate – he will of course say NO.
.
Well – according to the doctrine of decrees – whatsoever comes to pass is infallibly decreed.
Thus whatsoever interpretation comes to pass within a JWs brain – must have been infallibly decreed.
.
So a LOGICAL Calvinist would have to acknowledge that what has been decreed for the JW is a FALSE SENSE of scripture.
.
And that would be the case for the Mormon and the Atheist etc.
.
So Calvin’s god does in fact decree humans to have FALSE PERCEPTIONS
If a Calvinist is NOT ELECT and his PERCEPTION is that he IS ELECT – then Calvin’s god must have decreed it.
.
So part of the doctrine of decrees in Calvinism entails the deception of the believer.
.
Of course – asking a Calvinist to come to grips with that aspect of his doctrine is unrealistic.
.
Any Calvinist pastor honest enough to convey that aspect of the doctrine to his congregation knows he risks people leaving and not coming back – for obvious reasons.
.
Blessings!
br.d
FOH,
I don’t mean to beat a dead horse, but I’m going to do just that. You had referenced the following:
John 3:16“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Acts 4:12And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
John 14:6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Then you said:
“On this one main idea all Calvinists and non-Calvinist would agree.”
My response:
Do they both, though? Really? Anyone can quote the bible verses and say that they agree with the verses (in church, the preacher quotes verses all the time, everybody in the congregation shakes their head in agreement with an “AMEN, PREACHER, PREACH IT, BROTHER!”…until it’s time to dissect those verses. Then those verses end up saying anything but what was quoted. Such as, who is the “world” that God so loved? Who is the “whosoever”. Pre-sellected people from a raffle, and you might not be one of them…sucks being you! But God Loves Me! I’ve got the winning ticket! I can become an atheist tomorrow, and I’ll still be saved! But you…you can’t believe even if you wanted to. And that is GREAT NEWS!.
Now, in a multiverse, that would be a different Jesus, and wouldn’t that would be anathama?
Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9
As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
FOH,
And then we also have…
2 Corinthians 11:4
For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
19 For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.
20 For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face.
Not gonna spar with you Ed.
My point is simple: defining “another Jesus” is relative. Everyone’s thing is the best thing.
I noticed your quotes from the KJV. Do you know that there are many people that say that anyone who uses a translation other than the “authorized version” is “he that cometh [and] preacheth another Jesus”?
Claim’s this group “Other than the KJV is a false Gospel!” Everyone’s thing is the best thing.
There can be doubt in no one’s mind of my dislike for Calvinist philosophy …demonstrated for 10 years on this site. But….
Calvinists preach Christ and Christ crucified.
I certainly did when I was one! And by no means do I think that when I came out of Calvinism is when I got saved.
I have made my last comments on this thread.
FOH,
So, live and let live, huh? Interesting. But I’m sure that you would say differently to the Jehovah’s Witnesses that believe the gospel, but that Jesus is not God, or the Mormon’s who believe the gospel, who also believe that you can be the savior of your own planet, and the Satan is the brother of Jesus? I know you won’t respond, however. That’s fine.
On that note, I used to say, everybody has a truth. But at some point, you gotta ask, whose truth is truer?
(I tried sending this once and it froze. Hopefully it doesn’t send a duplicate.)
Brian: “Do you really believe the Calvinists whom you know as “wonderful godly people, truly wonderful”, and I’m assuming they believe firmly in Calvinism, which you call a false gospel, are truly saved while believing a false gospel?”
I think that, yes, Calvinists can be (and most probably are) true believers… because they either became Calvinists after becoming Christians, or they heard the biblical surface layer of Calvinism and put their faith in Jesus and then learned the deeper unbiblical parts of Calvinism.
[But I would doubt the salvation of those who became “saved” through honest Calvinist theology. Such as if a Calvinist told them that we can’t choose to believe in Jesus but that God has to give us faith, and so they just waited for God to give them faith and then they woke up one day and went “Well, I guess I’m one of the elect,” without ever having made a conscious choice to believe in Jesus… then I would doubt the authenticity of their faith. (Like John MacArthur who claims he always believed, that he never rebelled, and that he couldn’t even discern the moment God put saving faith in his heart. That’s suspect, to me.) But most Calvinists don’t evangelize that way. Most will make it seem like we can really make a choice about Jesus, and so, yes, people can be saved through that. And then it’s only afterwards that they get sucked into the deeper, unbiblical layer. Like I said, I think Calvinism is more about hijacking those who are already Christians.]
And you asked: “In other words, can someone get saved with the true gospel, become nice Christians, and believe fully and support fully the teaching of a false gospel, denying the true gospel.”
I never said they deny the true gospel. I think they believe the true gospel, but they’ve added a deeper, unbiblical layer to it later (after becoming a Christian) that they’ve been tricked into thinking coincides – in mysterious ways – with the surface layer, thinking it’s just a deeper understanding of the surface layer. I think they got trapped in bad theology after becoming saved. But instead of calling them all non-Christians, I’d rather give them the benefit of the doubt and try to help them see the error of the deeper layer, so that they can spit out the bad but keep the truth and their simple faith in Jesus.
You said: “I personally don’t, and would consider them not yet saved, no matter how godly they might seem, if indeed Calvinism is a false gospel.”
So then do you think true Christians cannot fall into error or get sucked into bad theology or be deceived later by cleverly-devised myths? If they fall for bad theology later, does it mean they were never saved to begin with? Paul warns the Church about not falling for error, but I don’t think he accuses them of never being truly saved if they do.
Once again, this is no expert opinion. It’s just my view based on knowing the people I know and watching Calvinism take over our church up-close. But in no way is this meant to be a blanket statement of all Calvinists.
Sure, Heather, believers can fall into believing unsound doctrine that is unhealthy, which is how I view Calvinism. But no, I don’t believe they can start believing a false gospel, which would be by its very nature an act of denial of the true gospel, imo.
For your view to be true, “wonderful godly people” can believe a true gospel and a false gospel at the same time and still be godly. Hmmm. 🤔 Believing and teaching harmful doctrine would not be a “wonderful, godly” thing. And believing and teaching a true gospel and false gospel at the same time would also not make me identify someone as “wonderful, godly”.
Thanks for the conversation and answering my pointed question. I’ve nothing more to add. Keep up the good work, standing for the truth!
And when I say “Paul warns the Church about not falling for error, but I don’t think he accuses them of never being truly saved if they do”… I’m not saying there are not cases where those who seem to be believers are truly unsaved. I’m sure there are plenty of cases of that. But I am saying that I don’t think Paul ever makes a blanket statement that every believer who falls into error was never a true believer.
True believers can get swayed later by lies, but it doesn’t mean they were/are not really saved. Just my two cents. And maybe this starts entering the realm of the debate over OSAS. And so for the record, I do not think true, Spirit-filled believers can lose salvation, even if we fall into theological error later. Once again, just my two cents. And I’m sure Ed might jump in here with views from the other side on this issue. 😉
God bless!
Brian, thanks for your thoughts and for making me think deeply about this. 🙂
And to clarify, not that it will make a difference, but when I said “godly,” it was less about their beliefs and more about their behaviors and how they live: they are some of the most thoughtful, loving, helpful, self-sacrificing people I know. The kind of Christians I would want beside me through any hard time.
But I agree that to believe a true gospel and yet a contradictory false gospel at the same time (though they don’t realize it) is not ultimately “godly” – not truly God-honoring or accurately representing God and His Truth – even if they behave in some of the most wonderful ways we would expect of Christians.
God bless! And thanks for asking deep, probing questions. Iron sharpens iron. 🙂
Hello FOH, Good to hear from you.
I think you might be mixing up what Brian and I say, unless I am understanding it wrong.
Brian says, as I understand it, that Calvinism is not a false gospel, and so Calvinists are truly saved. He thinks that it’s not possible for true believers to start believing a false gospel, and that if they did then it would mean they aren’t truly saved. And so since they are saved, it means Calvinism cannot be a false gospel. Just a warped one.
I, however, say that Calvinism is a different/false gospel, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that people who believe it are not saved. I think most Calvinists definitely are saved because they were Christians first before becoming a Calvinist. They just fell into a different, false gospel later.
So neither of us, as far as I can tell, are saying that Calvinists are not saved because they believe a false gospel. (I would add the caveat that if someone came to faith under honest Calvinist teaching – the idea that they just have to wake up one day and realize they are elect, that they cannot make a decision on their own about Jesus – then I would question their salvation. But Calvinism doesn’t usually spread this way. It spreads by taking over Christians.)
Although Brian thinks that true believers cannot, at some later point, fall into believing a false gospel, I think the Bible does show that the Church, true believers, can and do fall into false gospels.
Paul warns and condemns the church of Galatia about this when he writes: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.” (Gal. 1:6-7)
The “gospel” the Galatians began believing in – after coming to faith in Jesus – was that in order to be saved they needed faith in Jesus PLUS Jewish laws and customs (circumcision, in particular). Clearly this is a different way to salvation (faith plus works), a false way. And yet true believers were falling for it.
As Paul says, “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?… Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?” (Gal. 3:1-3)
They clearly started in the faith believing the true gospel, but then were bewitched – tricked – into the false gospel of “faith plus works.”
Three take-aways here:
1. Christians can fall for false gospels later. They can be tricked, bewitched, into foolishly believing a false gospel after starting faith “with the Spirit,” in truth.
2. The fact that Christians begin believing various things about salvation later doesn’t make it “true, just warped.” As Paul said, the Galatians – though they were saved – began believing in “a different gospel, no gospel,” and it was even deserving of eternal condemnation (verses 8-9). And notice that, like Calvinists, the Galatians weren’t really denying that salvation comes through Jesus – they still believed the true gospel, that salvation comes through Jesus – they just added another layer to it that Scripture doesn’t support. But the true gospel plus certain kinds of unbiblical layers equals “a different gospel,” not merely a “true but warped” gospel.
3. Just because we fall for a false gospel after coming to faith in Christ doesn’t mean we were never truly saved to begin with or that we lost our salvation. (But it will have a detrimental impact on our faith, our witness, our eternal rewards, and the Church.) Paul continues to acknowledge the Galatia church as “brothers” in the Lord, as true believers. But he challenges them to get back in line with the true gospel, to reject the lies and deceptions of false gospels that seek to pull them from the pure truth. There’d be no need to warn Christians about not falling for false gospels if Christians were not at risk of it.
Just some things to back up what I think. True Christians can fall for false gospels later, but it doesn’t mean they lost their salvation or were never really saved to begin with. And I think this is the case with many Calvinists.
So what is the gospel, according to Scripture, and why would I say Calvinism is a false gospel?
In addition to the verses you quoted, there’s 1 Cor. 15:1-4: “Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you… that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures…”
The gospel is that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and rose again, and through His death we are saved. And yes, Calvinists believe this at a most basic (limited) level.
But who is the “our” in “our sins”? What is the fuller picture of the gospel, of Jesus’s death, “according to the Scriptures”:
1 John 2:2: “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.”
John 1:29: “… ‘Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the whole world.”
1 Timothy 2:3-6: “This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who gave himself as a ransom for all men …”
1 Timothy 4:10: “… that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men…”
Romans 5:18: “Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.”
Here’s where Calvinism goes off-track and becomes a false gospel. (I’m not trying to convince you of this, just backing up what I think.) The Bible says that Jesus died for all people so that God could offer salvation to all people because God wants all people saved. But Calvinism says “No! Only the elect.” This doesn’t just warp the gospel; it changes it (the gospel, Jesus’s death) into something it’s not, into a plan of salvation for only a few pre-selected people even though the Bible says no such thing. In fact, it says the opposite. This is not the same kind of “good news.” It is a different kind of “good news,” limited to only a few people, contrary to what the Bible says. And if it’s contrary to something Scripture clearly says, I think that’s enough to make it false.
(Calvinism’s errors are not about things the Bible is unclear on, true mysteries. Calvinism’s errors are about things the Bible clearly says. The Bible clearly says one thing, but Calvinism goes “Nope! It doesn’t mean that.” This makes it not just warped, in my opinion, but false. A direct attack on God’s Truth.)
And not to mention that 1 Cor. 15:2 says, “by this gospel you are saved.” According to this and other verses, belief leads to salvation. Salvation is a result of belief. (And anyone can believe.)
But in Calvinism, belief is a result of salvation. Salvation leads to belief. (For a few preselected people.) This does not line up with “by this gospel you are saved.” Calvinism is “by election you are saved, and then you will believe in the gospel.” In Calvinism, salvation happens before belief in the gospel, before faith in Jesus, which technically makes it being saved without (before) the gospel and faith in Jesus.
I think this is warped enough to be a different way to salvation. A different gospel. A false gospel.
But once again, this doesn’t mean most Calvinists are not saved. I think most Calvinists are Christians who don’t realize they’ve been bewitched into false teachings about Christ’s death, His work on the cross, and how to be saved. (And if they did realize that Calvinism is an attack on God’s truth, they wouldn’t have fallen for it. They’ve been tricked into thinking it’s just “deeper truths,” when it’s really different “truths.”)
This is just my two cents.
God bless, FOH. And thanks for sharing your thoughts. And I won’t go on further with this either, just wanted to clarify because I think you’re misunderstanding what Brian and I are saying. Either that, or I’m misunderstanding. But I’ll let this issue rest now. Blessings! 🙂
Oops, my reply ended up in the wrong string of comments. It should be lower, under FOH’s. Oh well.
Oops, scratch that. Wrong again. Should be higher. Sorry. (Stupid computer.)
Heather wrote: “Sadly, it got to the point at our church where I couldn’t stomach anymore even the good things the Calvinist pastor said when he was trying to SOUND non-Calvinist… because even though I agreed with what he said on the surface, I knew what he really meant underneath and how deliberately deceptive he was being in how he presented his beliefs. Thankfully, most people didn’t know what he really meant and so they could probably get a lot of good teaching from it.”
This was our exact experience as well. We simply couldn’t continue in that environment and had to leave.
Heather wrote: “It would sound terrible if they were upfront with their true beliefs, but at least we’d know what they really believe and they couldn’t sucker naive, well-meaning people in with cult-like tactics and carefully-worded deceptions.”
I actually had a conversation with a good friend, who is a staunch Calvinist, about this very thing. I asked, so why doesn’t the pastor just come out and say what he really believes. His response was “it wouldn’t sell”! Can you believe that. They certainly know what they are doing.
Thanks for your well thought out commments Heather. God bless you as well!
Andy, Sorry to hear about your experience with your church. I totally understand.
You said that your friend’s response was “it wouldn’t sell”. I agree they know what they’re doing. And yet I don’t understand how they can believe, on one hand, that their theology is the most accurate, godly one which brings God enormous glory… and yet, on the other hand, believe that they have to hide or obscure it as much as possible, slathering it in more palatable ideas. It’s ironic and very telling!
God bless. And I hope you’ve found a good church after leaving the other one. 🙂
br.d
Hello ANDYB and welcome.
.
Yes – you make good points!
.
In my dialogs with many Calvinists over the years – I have discovered – the face of Calvinism which they present has been carefully DE-FANGED.
.
All of the components of divine evil are hidden behind carefully crafted language.
.
The art of Calvinism is the ability to ply SHELL-GAMES with words.
.
It is a highly engineered language designed to hide what they don’t want to see – and don’t want others to see.
.
That Calvinism has been presented to them by some Calvinist pastor or teacher – who understands if he TELLS THE TRUTH about the doctrine and reveals its components of divine evil – his congregation will dwindle down to a handful of hard-core Calvinists who can look people in the face and tell them his god enjoys throwing babies into the fire – and takes pleasure in their torment.
.
No Calvinist pastor or teacher wants to end up with a congregation like that!
So they learn to become experts in the use of COSMETIC language.
.
I believe this trend actually started about 100 years after Calvin’s death.
This is when we have the creation of Calvinism’s TULIP
And the TULIP is simply a marketing tool – designed to hide tho dark aspects of the doctrine.
.
Calvinists over the years have also created confessions.
Which if you examine the wording in them – you will discover they are also designed to hide the dark aspects of the doctrine.
.
You will find – many Calvinist teachers today will refuse to quote from Calvin
Because Calvin was in his day – the sole defender of his doctrine – and would not blink at declaring divine evil.
.
Calvinists today do not have a stomach for that.
Blessings!
br.d
I’m just throwing this out there since it seems to fit here, even though it’s from the other side.
Here’s something High Calvinist John MacArthur said about the “doctrine of total depravity” in the article “The Most Hated Christian Doctrine” at Grace to You:
“As long as people try to hide the doctrine of depravity, as long as people try to take the offenses out of the gospel, they will disillusion people in the most severe way, who think they’re evangelicals when they couldn’t possibly be Christians at all. We have to be honest enough to give the hated bad news [Calvinism’s doctrine of total depravity] in order to deliver to the sinner the good news that, ‘Oh, by the way, though you can do nothing about it, Christ will accept you by grace.’ That’s the message of the gospel.”
According to MacArthur, the gospel is that because of total depravity, we can’t do anything to be saved, not even choose to believe in Christ. And if we don’t agree, then we aren’t even Christians at all.
Also from MacArthur (in “Answering Big Questions about the Sovereignty of God,” Grace to You): “We would say you can’t be a Christian if you have a wrong view of Christ. Can we – can you be a Christian if you have a completely wrong view of God?… [No.]”
So according to him and his belief that Calvinism is the right view, those of us who have a non-Calvinist view of God and Christ are not even Christians.
A.W. Pink agrees (in “Doctrine of Election”): “those who continue to cavil against [Calvinism] [who make petty or unnecessary objections against it] and steadfastly refuse any part of the truth, are not entitled to be regarded as Christians.”
So basically, according to Calvinists, if we disagree with Calvinism’s doctrine of total depravity or have “wrong” views of God and Christ (compared to their supposedly “right” views), then we aren’t Christians at all, which means we are believing and spreading a false gospel.
Sounds like they themselves consider Calvinism and non-Calvinism different gospels, and – of course, in their eyes – only theirs leads to salvation.
Just some food for thought. 🙂
br.d
The interesting thing about this argument by MacArthur – is that he is doing the very thing he is accusing others of doing.
-quote
As long as people try to hide the doctrine of depravity……
.
What MacArthur himself is hiding – is the fact that by punting to the CONDITION of the creature – he is *OBFUSCATING* the foundational core of Calvinist doctrine.
.
John Calvin
-quote
For it did not take place by reason of *NATURE* that, by the guilt of one parent, all were cut off from salvation.
.
-quote
Since this cannot be ascribed to *NATURE* it is perfectly clear that it has come forth from the….plan of God (Institutes 3.23.7)
.
-quote
men can deliberately do nothing unless he *INSPIRE* it. (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God pg 171–172)
.
In Calvinism – an infallible decree determines that state of every man’s *NATURE* at every nano-second in time.
And at any nano-second in time – the state of man’s *NATURE* cannot be other than what it was decreed to infallibly be.
.
And man is granted NO SAY, NO CHOICE, and NO CONTROL in the matter.
.
So MacArthur punting to *NATURE* as the CAUSE of anything – is MacArthur TRYING TO HIDE the truth of his own doctrine.
Heather, br.d & Everyone Else
On the website
stillchasinglight.wordpress.com
I found an article headlined
“Gods Of The Quid Pro Quo”
MARCH 11, 2024 by GREG DOLES
What do we think ?
Is Calvinism a form of
Spiritual gaslighting or Manipulation ?
It’s important to Reiterate, that I hope Jesus Returns no later than the End of the year
2025. There is too much Evil, Suffering, Hatred & Injustice in America and Worldwide
I truly hope Jesus Returns literally by the End of 2025 and Eliminates all Evil, Suffering and Injustice in the World once and for All Forever, and makes the World a Perfect Utopian Paradise, where there will be Perfect Love and Face to Face Friendship and Fellowship
With other Human Beings, Among Human Beings
Quality but also Quantity of Friendships
There is too much Loneliness and Social Isolation in America and Worldwide . I don’t want my fellow Human Beings or Animals to Suffer
br.d
Hello Jeff – good to hear form you.
.
Yes – if one knows what to look for, one can clearly see the language of Calvinism is a highly manipulated language.
.
You need to be able to distinguish the difference between a LOGICAL argument and a SEMANTIC argument.
.
There is a good example of a SEMANTIC argument on Youtube
The title is: I identify as the correct person” – Michael Knowles
.
A person who is born a man argues the following:
I identify as a woman – therefore I am a woman – and you are required to accept my claim.
.
Michael Knowles is a logical person.
He understands this is NOT a logical claim.
.
I have many dialogs with Calvinists that follow this same exact pattern.
.
Calvinist: I believe 2×3=6
.
Me: You do realize that 6/3=2 logically follows from that don’t you?
.
Calvinist: NO! That is not what I believe! You are misrepresenting my belief!
.
Concerning the topic of “Quid Pro Quo”
If you do any research on witchcraft you will find “Quid Pro Quo” is the fundamental principle.
In order to get something from a Demon – you have to give something to that Demon.
What the person gives to the Demon – is one piece of their soul after another piece of the soul – after another.
.
You will recall the story of Elijah on Mount Carmel and the prophets of Baal
Elijah challenges them
What you will find the prophets of Baal doing – is trying to “Quid Pro Quo” Baal
But we both know Baal is not real – it is simply demons whom the prophets of Baal are dabbling with.
But the relationship between the Demon and the prophets of Baal is a “Quid Pro Quo” relationship.
.
This is the case with King Saul also – when he disobeys God’s command at Gilgal
He wants to offer a sacrifice to God in order to get God to do what he wants
Saul is treating God the same way he would treat a Demon – by “Quid Pro Quo”
Saul will eventually turn to a witch in order to get what he wants
.
Another example is with Baalam in the book of Numbers
Baalam is trying to get God to give him what he wants
He goes from one high-place to another offering up sacrifices
This is a “Quid Pro Quo” relationship.
.
Personally – I don’t see Calvinists falling into this pattern.
But Calvinists are extremely reliant upon WORD GAMES in order to evade what their doctrine stipulates.
.
A serious consequence of Calvinism’s system of WORD GAMES is that it forces them into various forms of dishonesty.4
.
Calvinist WORD GAMES include:
– Lies of omission – (obfuscating the component of divine malevolence towards mankind)
– SEMANTIC TAP-DANCE ROUTINES (attempts to evade what the doctrine stipulates)
– DOUBLE-SPEAK (attempts to evade what the doctrine stipulates)
.
The key things to understand – are what the doctrine stipulates – and the Calvinist’s natural response to what the doctrine stipulates.
.
You will eventually discover every serious Calvinist is involved in an internal struggle with what the doctrine stipulates.
And WORD GAMES are his primary strategy of evasion.
.
blessings
br.d
jeffster,
You had said:
“There is too much Loneliness and Social Isolation in America and Worldwide . I don’t want my fellow Human Beings or Animals to Suffer”
When Disturbed’s cover version of Simon and Garfunkle’s “Sound of Silence” came out, it was extremely emotional, brought tears to me, and it affected me for days. I’ve watched a lot of YouTube reaction video’s of that cover song, and it has the same emotional effect on a lot of people, knowing that in the days of Simon and Garfunkle, we didn’t have that much loneliness or social isolation. Their version was like a prophesy, whereas Disturbed’s version is like reality today. It’s gut wrenching to see that reality as we live now.
Ed Chapman
Hi Ed when you say this i find it to be, true;
“in the days of Simon and Garfunkle, we didn’t have that much loneliness or social isolation” but i do agree we have much more now!
i appreciate you bringing this particular song into this conversation sadly it happens to be one of the last songs on a cd i have of my son’s favorites. This song still causes pain and tears for me, so thank you for bringing it up because there is defiantly a lack of hope within it.
My son took his own life on October 21 2016 not long after i learned of calvinism or rather was deeply troubled by it…
I hate this systematic, but I’m learning to love the people within it or at least trying to.. and to point out the flaws ie. contradictions when i feel led to…
I was not raised to trust God nor did i raise my children to trust Him, but i trust He’s above this “ism” –ugh i find it hard not to feel h***** toward it….
I’m hoping to always remember this is a spiritual battle, though I’m beyond thankful for all of you who see calvinism for what it is…
Yey i want to know/trust when it’s time for me to walk away.
Thank you again🌻
Reggie
Reggie,
Oh, Reggie, I’m so sorry about your son. Yes, we are living in a time in the world where it is so upside down, and I certainly never expected to live to see the extreme serious spiritual battle that the whole world is under right now. When I grew up, we had church bells ringing on Sunday. Now, it’s an offense to a lot of people. I don’t understand it. God is being kicked out of society, where evil is good, and good is evil.
YouTube also has a video where back in 1965 I think, Paul Harvey, who used to do a radio show, predicted today. It’s called, “If I were the Devil”. And we have arrived.
Isaiah 5:20
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Ed Chapman
Thank you Ed
I absolutely agree with you such a rejection of God and an exchange for less so very sad to see those call evil good and good evil, but it’s definitely more prevalent.. I did listen to this Paul Harvey clip once a while ago, and it was good i will check it out again.
Maranatha🌻
Reggie
Sorry i meant exchange for lies.. not less.
In Early 2024 , a fellow Christian
typed online
About Heaven and the
Coming New Earth
“The SAME NEW Heavens and NEW Earth — (again NOTE that its ALSO a NEW EARTH) that the Apostle Peter spoke about that is PERFECT AND COMPLETE
That is why GOD said He will create NEW Heavens AND NEW Earth meaning He will NOT ONLY purge out the old HEAVENS (where Satan has access to GOD in accusing our brethren) BUT ALSO THE old Earth where wickedness rules
That is why there will not only be perfect spiritual (Heavens) blessings, bliss and happiness in the WORLD TO COME but ALSO physical and material (Earth) blessings and happiness as well.
But UNLIKE the present world we now know, the World to Come would be A PERFECT WORLD and not a mixture of good and evil, joy and sorrow BECAUSE Satan the devil and the fallen would no longer exist in that Age BUT only the SAVED ONES with their Savior AND KING for all eternity.
So yes, the WONDROUS BEAUTY AND GLORY OF World to Come is beyond our wildest imaginations and would be “MORE than we ask OR think” because its not just a perfect Utopia BUT A Golden Age.
A NEW Heavens AND A NEW Earth where RIGHTEOUSNESS Reigns. (2 Peter 3:13) where both The KING and His People will live a happy, harmonious and peaceful life forevermore
Lets all look forward to that Day.”
See Also Matthew 6:10
Revelation 21:4
& Revelation 22:20
br.d
And the biggest blessing of all – is that we are going to be with Jesus!!!!
And we’re going to be closer to the God of this universe – who dearly loves us!!
.
Oh what a wonderful day!!! 😀
blessings!
Someone typed online earlier today
“On this Easter Sunday. March 31st, 2024 many sincere Roman Catholics will go to church to take part in the Mass.
The Eucharist of the Roman Catholic Church. This is the doctrine that is called Transubstantiation which in the teaching that the mass wafer turn into the actual, literal Flesh of Christ.
The reason for belief is that the words of Jesus are taken literally, by many people, for Jesus had said “This is my body” about the bread at the last Supper. The same about His blood. When Jesus said “This is my blood” Could it be that Jesus was really using a figure of speech in that Jesus meant it in a symbolic way? In reply the priests of the church of Roman will say “Then why didn’t Jesus then say “This represents my body “and “This represents by blood”? The reason Jesus did not use the word “represents” is because Jesus knew His disciples had enough sense to understand that they were not eating literal flash and drinking literal blood. After all, the disciples of Jesus were not ghouls and Jesus saw still whole for He had not yet gone to the cross. To explain this in another way, at the gym I had shown one of the women ,who likes cats , two pictures of my cats. I said to her “These are my cats” and not “These pictures represent my cats” She understood by common sense, without me saying so that those pictures only represented my cats. Jesus had also said the he was a door, John 10:9. Was Jesus literally a door? He said I was. Jesus also said that He was a vine, John 15:1. Was Jesus really a vine?’ he said he was .
Furthermore, Jesus had taught that he “did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it.’ Matthew 5:17. The point is that the Old Testament law had forbidden the drinking of blood, Genesis 9:4. So Jesus would have had his disciple be breaking the law, as in going against the law if He had His disciples literally drink blood. Much later after the New Testament Christian Church was established, by church law the drinking of blood was further forbidden. Acts 19:20.
In addition to all of this, in relation to this topic of the Eucharist. Back in the twentieth century I had visited the wonderful city of Paris in France. In That city on the top of a hill sat a church that is called Sacr’e –Coeur.in that church at the top of the that church’s altar stood a Mass Wafer it was supposed to have had been changed in the literal flesh of Jesus by transubstantiation . This seen In the light of the Bible as the way to tell doctrinal truth from doctrinal error, as taught in Isaiah 8:20. The Bible book of Acts 1:9,10 which gives information about the ascension of Jesus up into heaven and the disciples were watching this great and one-time event there stood two men , maybe angles ?,”in white apparel who said to them “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven / This same Jesus Who was taken up from you into heaven .will so come in like manner as you saw him go into heaven.” So since Jesus will come back to earth in the same way He left ,in the sky with people seeing him. Jesus could not be then, in essence, on a hill in Paris or any other city for that matter. All this I have keyboarded not to upset or offend but to inform and make known the truth . Which is the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Transubstantiation is a hoax. I don’t enjoy keyboarding this but it need to be known.
In addition ,for more little known information about Christmas and the rite of the Mass there is the site theconversioncenter.com ”
How can we relate this to our Discussion about Calvinism and Biblical Interpretation ?
Hello Jeffrey and welcome
.
Yes – what you are describing is highly recognized as the study of “Semantics” within Philosophy.
.
Philosophy has been described by Dr. Alvin Plantinga – as simply thinking “Deeply” about something.
But it also assumes to be thinking “Logically” about something.
.
Semantics is the study of meaning.
One of the issues with semantics is “Equivocation” in which there can be more than one meaning.
.
Your example of a picture of cats is a good example.
Another example would be a mother whose son is dressed in a suit.
The mother says: “Look at Johnny’s suit”
.
What are the implications of this statement?
Did Johnny have a choice about whether or not he would be dresses in this suit?
.
If Johnny is a 40 year old man – the answer would commonly be understood as YES
If Johnny is a baby – the answer would commonly be understood as NO
.
The difference between these two is the degree of what people commonly understand as “Autonomy”
Autonomy equates to a state of “Self-Determining”
.
A grown adult man is commonly understood as “Self-Determining”
A baby is commonly understood as not “Self-Determining”
The baby’s parents assume the role of “Determining” what will be the case for the baby
.
Your last statement asks the question – how can we relate this to our Discussion about Calvinism?
.
This is a critical question
Because – as Dr. William Lane Craig points out – Calvinism entails “Radical Distinctions”
.
The foundational core of Calvinism – is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as enunciated within Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
John Calvin explains
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
Calvinist Robert R. McLaughlin
-quote
“God merely *PROGRAMMED* into the divine decrees all our thoughts, motives and actions”(The Doctrine of Divine Decree pg 4)
.
So in Calvinism – there is no such thing as a human being “Self-Determining”
The relationship between Calvin’s god and all humans – is identical to the relationship between a parent and a baby.
.
Calvin’s god makes all of the determinations about whatsoever will come to pass.
The Calvinist – because of this – becomes a *RADICALLY* different human.
The Calvinist is no longer a NORMAL human.
The Calvinist is thus faced with an internal struggle
And this struggle will show up in Calvinist “Semantics”
Calvinist “Semantics” have a well earned reputation of being highly misleading.
.
Consider these two statements:
A) The Calvinist committed a sin
B) The Calvinist performed a sin
.
Which statement is misleading within the context of Calvinism?
Statement (A) is misleading because it *OBFUSCATES* the critical factor of Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
An infallible decree determines every impulse that will come to pass within the human brain.
And an infallible decree does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees
.
So if it is decreed that Calvinist_A will perform SIN_X at TIME-T
Then that decree does not grant Calvinist_A any ALTERNATIVE
That decree also includes the impulse that will infallibly come to pass within Calvinist_A’s brain at TIME-T
And NO ALTERNATIVE impulse is granted existence within Calvinist_A’s brain
.
So Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees *RADICALLY* alters what is understood as the case
.
This is why so numerous NON-Calvinist authors recognize DOUBLE-SPEAK as a consistent characteristic of Calvinist language.
.
Dr. William Lutz – American Linguist writes
-quote
Double-speak works by taking advantage of the inherent implicitness of meaning conveyed through everyday language.
.
It takes advantage of the fact that normal everyday language use is fundamentally cooperative.
Doublespeak exploits these principles to do just the opposite.
.
To *APPEAR* like honest communication while actually hiding incriminating facts. “
.
Understanding this characteristic about Calvinist language – is critical – because one is otherwise guaranteed to be mislead by Calvinist statements.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Thanks, I hate to be redundant
But earlier this year
I found this interesting comment online
“(Christian universalism) Philippians 2:11 King James Version “And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
[Christian universalists use Scriptures like Acts 3:21 (“And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began), and Colossians 1:20 (And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven) to show that GOD intends to restore all things to their original state of purity through Christ Jesus. This doesn’t run counter to the teachings of some other Scriptures which state “all who call upon the name of the Lord” will be united to Christ and eternally saved. Christian universalists acknowledge GOD already has the way for all people in general to call upon the name of the Lord of their own choice. YES, all creation will confess Christ Jesus as Lord and believe that GOD has raised Christ from the dead (Romans 10:9) and all creation will ultimately be saved and reconciled to a right relationship with GOD through Christ (Colossians 1:20). This will happen in this life or the afterlife. See 1 Peter 3;19-20 that Christ preached to the spirits in prison which sometime were disobedient.
Some Scriptures seem to support “eternal” punishment or “eternal” separation from GOD. Matthew 25 contains some of them and these cannot be taken as a correct translation. Much of Christian universalist thought depends on the translation of the word αἰώνιος(Gr), aionios (E), into English from the ancient Greek. A period of endless duration was never the most literal acceptation of the Greek adjective aionios. Throughout the whole of ancient and late antique Greek literature, an “aion”, the noun form of aionios, was most properly an “age,” which is simply to say a “substantial period of time” or an “extended interval.” At first, it was typically used to indicate the lifespan of a single person, though sometimes it could be used for a considerably shorter period (even a single year).
The phrase “unto the ages of ages” can imply the idea of eternity when used in reference to GOD (e.g. in Philippians 4:20, “Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”), but most literally it is an indeterminate number of ages. The phrase “unto the ages of ages” is a translation of the original Koine Greek phrase εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων (eis toùs aionas ton aiṓnōn), which occurs in the Greek manuscriptss of the Christian New Testament.
It seems clear we should understand passages such as in Matthew 25:46 when it states, “And these shall go away into (aionios) everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (aionios)”, to be referring to the life of the “age” to come and the fire or punishment of the “age” to come. This fits the meaning of the word, and it fits the context. This means it would be inappropriate to use these passages to teach eternal conscious torment. To insist that the punishment mentioned must be eternal because the life is eternal is simply erroneous. This verse is not addressing the duration of either the punishment or life. By the way, we have many other passages that tell us the life to come is, in fact, never-ending. We don’t need this passage to establish that truth. And we have many passages that tell us GOD’s wrath isn’t eternal such as (Sodom”s fiery judgment is “eternal” (Jude 7), that is–until–“the Lord will restore the fortunes of Sodom” (Ezk.16:55). The word aionios doesn’t mean eternal (as most agree). So, it’s completely improper to import this meaning “eternal” into this verse when it’s not what the Scripture is saying in this verse about either punishment or life.
However, one of the pillars of Christianity is that the Bible, as the Word of God, is inerrant. Most recognize this statement is referring to the original manuscripts not the translations. We got to have the translations, but to go back to the Greek manuscripts for a word study is to go back to the Word of GOD.]” What do we think of this comment and how can we apply it to our debate and discussion on
Calvinism ?
Hi Jeff,
I hope this finds you well
.
Well – universalism is a minority view to the extreme.
You do understand – every group who adheres to a given theology is going read that theology into scripture.
.
The Calvinist reads EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) into the text of scripture.
.
Of course – every group is going to claim they do not read their theology into scripture
They simply read what the text says.
.
And any logical person can realize how irrational that claim is!!!
.
We had a fellow pop in here a while ago who is convinced the scripture teaches the earth is flat.
He gets upset with people who laugh at him.
I think that fellow was also a Calvinist.
But he didn’t necessarily have to be a Calvinist.
.
Personally – I think a major vulnerability to universalism – is the fact that all of the warning texts within the NT are going to have to be MADE VOID in order for the universalist to ignore them.
.
The major vulnerability for the Calvinist – is that Determinism is such a radical belief system – that it is humanly impossible to live coherently with what the doctrine stipulates – and at the same time retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
Here is something for you to think about.
When you look at a picture of a Duck – you know by looking at it – what kind of creature it is.
When you look at a picture of a Cow – you know by looking at it – what kind of creature it is.
.
The word “Duck” is a LABEL
The word “Cow” is a LABEL
.
These words are LABELS which point to a creature – which has certain attributes.
.
In Calvinism we have “Determinism” and we have “Libertarian Choice”
These are LABELS
Each LABEL points to a world and a reality having certain attributes.
.
A world governed by “Determinism” has certain attributes
Everything is 100% predestined – and *INFALLIBLY FIXED* and cannot possibly be other than what it was decreed to be.
And an infallible decree does not grant ALTERNATIVES from that which it decrees.
.
So ALTERNATIVES do not exist within a world governed by “Determinism”
.
Libertarian Choice – is defined as a choice between ALTERNATIVES which exist
For example:
[SIN] vs [NOT SIN] are ALTERNATIVES
.
In a world governed by “Determinism” (aka Calvinism)
If it is decreed that Calvinist_A will perform SIN_X at TIME-T
That decree does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE
Any ALTERNATIVE which existed – would falsify the decree
.
Consequently – Calvinists – per the doctrine – do not have CHOICE between ALTERNATIVES
Simply because ALTERNATIVES do not exist for the Calvinist to choose between.
.
Calvinists do not like that aspect of their doctrine
They want to have choice between ALTERNATIVES
What they want is “Libertarian Choice” – which is a choice which they themselves are granted the “Liberty” of making.
.
So the Calvinist cannot live coherently with “Determinism”
He will claim “Libertarian Choice” does not exist
But every time he assumes to choose between TRUE and FALSE on any matter – he is choosing between two ALTERNATIVES which his belief system stipulates do not exist.
.
So the universalist has the vulnerability of assuming he is saved no mater what.
And the Calvinist has the vulnerability of being DOUBLE-MINDED – and living in a world of DOUBLE-SPEAK.
.
I do not envy either of these people!!!
.
blessings
Br.d
In June 2023 , a friend gave me a
2022 reprint of the 2009 copyright of “The Ruckman Reference Bible” Authorized King James Version of 1611 by the late Peter S. Ruckman
Very good footnotes and commentary ,
Then in March 2024 I was given
The 1611 Authorized King James Bible
“The Common Man’s Reference Bible” by David Allen Hoffman , printed in 2015 , also with very good footnotes and commentary
Both with different Interpretations of Scripture , it’s so perplexing and Mind boggling. Again I just hope that for us Christians in Heaven and the New Earth God makes it possible for us Christians to understand the Bible perfectly, every aspect of Doctrine, Theology & Interpretation perfectly, as only God himself knows, endless different Interpretations
br.d
Hello Jeff,
Perhaps someone is trying to influence you – by giving you Bibles containing commentaries which would bend your understanding a certain direction which they would want you to go.
.
I personally would not allow myself to be influenced in that manner.
.
Many years ago – Catholicism dominated the world.
And the scriptures where locked away – unavailable to the general public.
Then the printing press was invented.
And the Bible was printed – but illegally.
And if the dominating power discovered you had a bible you would be burned to the stake
.
But more copies of the Bible continued to be printed.
And more people who thirsted after the word of God had access to it.
And the dominating power at that point realized they could no kill everyone.
.
So the next tactic was to have a priest stand over your shoulder when you are reading – and have that priest tell you what each verse means.
.
If they cant keep you from reading it – they can at least control your mind while you are reading it.
.
That dominating power – is in fact what Paul would call a “Principality and Power”
.
So there are groups of people operating today – trying to convince you they care about you and want the best for you.
They would have you believe – the Bible cannot be rightly understood without them functioning as a priest standing over your shoulder – telling you what God said.
.
These people are simply functioning as a Principality and Power – following after the pattern of the previous dominating power.
.
blessings!
br.d
Hi Jeff, Yeah, it can be confusing sometimes. My suggestion is to skip commentaries for now and simply let God speak to you through His Word. Pray for insight and discernment and then read through the Bible all on your own, a couple times, skipping other people’s views for now. See what God teaches you. 🙂
God bless!
Heather , good point , a person typed online
“God is Omnipotent ,Omniscient and controls Everything, unless something bad happens, Then that was Satan” Any Opinions
But different people study and read the Bible and reach different conclusions, see my point
Hi Jeff: “God is Omnipotent ,Omniscient and controls Everything, unless something bad happens, Then that was Satan”
I don’t believe God controls everything. I believe He is IN CONTROL but not controlling everything. And there’s a big difference.
To control everything (like in Calvinism) means that God preplans, causes, controls everything, even sin, evil, and what Satan does and everything we do/think – and we have no ability to choose anything else. In that, God is ultimately responsible for all that happens, even though Calvinists claim that man has a secondary level of responsibility. But there is really no true free-will in that at all, despite Calvinists claiming there is, which makes God the author/causer/controller of all evil.
But God being “in control” means that He watches over all, knows all, works all things into His plans in the best way possible, decides what to allow and when to override things and what the consequences should be, etc. Sometimes He allows things (like our choices and natural processes) and sometimes He causes things (but never sin or evil). But He can and does put people in situations that will force them to make the decisions He knows they will make, even if He knows they will choose sin, so that He can work it into His plans or expose/discipline it, etc. But He did not preplan their choice or put the sin in their hearts or force them to be wicked or prevent them from being able to make any other decision. This is how God can be in authority over evil and work evil into His plans, but not be responsible for it.
Whereas in Calvinism, He is most definitely responsible for all sin and evil because He preplanned all sins and gave people no ability to choose otherwise. Satan and people are allowed to make various choices within boundaries – and God chooses to either allow it or override it, and He chooses how to work it into His plans – but He does not force us to be evil or do evil.
This is how I see it, briefly. God bless!
In Other comments on this website I mentioned the possibility that
Christian Universalism is True
upgradingearth.org has an article in Support of Christian Universalism headlined
“LEAVING HELL BEHIND
How the Law of Christ Decrees the Salvation, Reconciliation, and Restoration of All Things!”
by Jamie Slaats
I wonder if it is possible to be a
Calvinist Universalist, but do we think the upgradingearth.org article is a good article in Support of
Christian Universalism
Plus
stillchasinglight.wordpress.com has an article by Greg Doles
headlined
“This Until Something Else” on
June 3, 2024
& Another article from
stillchasinglight.wordpress.com by
Greg Doles on May 20, 2024
headlined
“Peeling the Ontological Onion”
& also by Greg Doles on
stillchasinglight.wordpress.com an article is headlined
“Entropy of the Mind” on
June 17, 2024 What do we think of these articles ?
br.d
Hi Jeff,
On your question about Calvinism and universalism – I think we can assume those two positions would be in radical opposition to each other.
.
A critical aspect of Calvinism DUALISM in which “Good” and “Evil” are both byproducts of the THEOS
In Calvinism “Good” and “Evil” are Co-Equal, Co-Complimentary, and Co-Necessary
Calvin’s god is essentially a “GOOD-EVIL” god.
.
He creates the vast majority of individuals within the total human population – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his “GOOD” pleasure.
.
So in Calvinism creating people for “Evil” is done for the sake of “Good” pleasure.
Thus “Evil” becomes “Good”
.
Therefore “Good-Evil” is a critical component of Calvinism.
And that is a critical component of the doctrine
Universalism would nullify that component.
.
So because that is the case – Universalism would be seen as a destroyer of a critical aspect of Calvinist doctrine.
So for that reason – you can see why Universalism would be anathema in Calvinism.
It would threaten the Calvinist conception of divine sovereignty.
.
Blessings!
br.d
What would we say is most wrong with the way Calvinists interpret Scripture ?
As opposed to the correct way to interpret the Bible ?
It’s Also Not just the
Original Hebrew & Greek that’s confusing even to Scholars often
But there are Countless different English Translations and Versions of the Bible that translate many verses Very Differently
It’s so confusing
Some people typed on a Online Bible Discussion Group about
Calvinism that
“This is what Arminians hate more than anything – SCRIPTURE. They grab onto one scripture, twist it AND take it out of context, and refuse to ever learn because they are not Spirit led. What scripture exactly states that Calvinist OSASers are not holy nor pursuing holiness, but legalists are? I think you better read Galatians and quit typing.
Did the book of Galatians fall out of your Bibles? Anyone who thinks that anything they “do” keeps their salvation, biblically speaking, YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE. (Galatians 5:4).
That’s what the SCRIPTURE says.
You who believe you are justified BY WHAT YOU DO, YOU have fallen from grace. Not the believer – YOU.
Anti-OSASers need to understand the work of the Holy Spirit and quit pointing their boney, unholy fingers at others.
“For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” (Romans 5:10).
You teach differently. You go AGAINST scripture. You say we may be reconciled to God, but then lose it by what we do with our lives. Scripture NEVER says that. Read the above verse. We are reconciled to God by FAITH, and having been reconciled, we are saved by HIS LIFE. We aren’t reconciled and then lose it by OUR lives. We are reconciled and saved by HIS LIFE. We are GIVEN His righteousness!
What problem do you have with His life? What problem do YOU have with HIS righteousness? Our perfect righteousness is a GIFT from God, not something we pretend we have in the flesh by obeying the law. What saith the scripture?
“And be found in him, NOT having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith.” (Phl 3:9).
Is John lying?
“And this is THE testimony: that God HAS GIVEN US ETERNAL LIFE, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son HAS life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who BELIEVE in the name of the Son of God, that you may KNOW that you HAVE eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.” (1 John 5:11-13)
Believer’s are NOT potentially saved. They ARE SAVED.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness but unto us which ARE SAVED, it is the power of God. (1st Cor 1:18)
For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that ARE SAVED. (2nd Cor 2:15)
For by grace YOU ARE SAVED, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. (Eph 2:8)
I GIVE UNTO THEM ETERNAL LIFE and THEY SHALL NEVER PERISH, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:28)
He that believeth on the Son HAS EVERLASTING LIFE (John 3:36)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, HAS EVERLASTING LIFE, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me HAS EVERLASTING LIFE. (John 6:47)
Whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood HAS ETERNAL LIFE, and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:54)
And this is the PROMISE that HE HAS PROMISED US, even ETERNAL LIFE. (1st John 2:25)
This is the record, that God HAS GIVEN TO US ETERNAL LIFE and this life is in his Son. (1Jn 5:11)
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Eph 2:8-9).
Believers sins are GONE, and WILL NOT be remembered:
As far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us. (Ps 103:12)
“I, even I, am He who BLOTS OUT your transgressions for My own sake; and I WILL NOT REMEMBER YOUR SINS. ” (Isaiah 43:25).
Jeremiah received this joyful message: “I will forgive their iniquity, and THEIR SIN WILL I REMEMBER NO MORE. ” (Jeremiah 31:34).
Can you read, O pharisee?
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES unto them (2 Cor 5:19).
Perhaps the Lord will give you a REAL Christmas gift, and allow you – BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD – to put away childish beliefs. Arminians do nothing but point fingers at their own will and works, while insisting that any who BELIEVE the gospel, are sealed by the Spirit, and know the word better than they, are somehow lost, sinning willfully, and not working hard enough to produce self-righteousness.
How long will you be willingly (by your own will) blind??”
OSAS stands for
Once Saved Always Saved
&
“Arminians run around saying they willed themselves to God of their own power and will, when scripture teaches just the opposite. They also HATE the fact that salvation is a GIFT from God – a gift He does not take from us because we err in some fashion. What scripture exactly states that Calvinist OSASers are not holy nor pursuing holiness, but legalists are? I think you better read Galatians and quit typing.
Did the book of Galatians fall out of your Bibles? Anyone who thinks that anything they “do” keeps their salvation, biblically speaking, YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE. (Galatians 5:4).
That’s what the SCRIPTURE says.
You who believe you are justified BY WHAT YOU DO, YOU have fallen from grace. Not the believer – YOU.
Anti-OSASers need to understand the work of the Holy Spirit and quit pointing their boney, unholy fingers at others.
“For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” (Romans 5:10).
You teach differently. You go AGAINST scripture. You say we may be reconciled to God, but then lose it by what we do with our lives. Scripture NEVER says that. Read the above verse. We are reconciled to God by FAITH, and having been reconciled, we are saved by HIS LIFE. We aren’t reconciled and then lose it by OUR lives. We are reconciled and saved by HIS LIFE. We are GIVEN His righteousness!
What problem do you have with His life? What problem do YOU have with HIS righteousness? Our perfect righteousness is a GIFT from God, not something we pretend we have in the flesh by obeying the law. What saith the scripture?
“And be found in him, NOT having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith.” (Phl 3:9).
Is John lying?
“And this is THE testimony: that God HAS GIVEN US ETERNAL LIFE, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son HAS life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who BELIEVE in the name of the Son of God, that you may KNOW that you HAVE eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.” (1 John 5:11-13)
Believer’s are NOT potentially saved. They ARE SAVED.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness but unto us which ARE SAVED, it is the power of God. (1st Cor 1:18)
For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that ARE SAVED. (2nd Cor 2:15)
For by grace YOU ARE SAVED, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. (Eph 2:8)
I GIVE UNTO THEM ETERNAL LIFE and THEY SHALL NEVER PERISH, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:28)
He that believeth on the Son HAS EVERLASTING LIFE (John 3:36)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, HAS EVERLASTING LIFE, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me HAS EVERLASTING LIFE. (John 6:47)
Whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood HAS ETERNAL LIFE, and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:54)
And this is the PROMISE that HE HAS PROMISED US, even ETERNAL LIFE. (1st John 2:25)
This is the record, that God HAS GIVEN TO US ETERNAL LIFE and this life is in his Son. (1Jn 5:11)
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Eph 2:8-9).
Believers sins are GONE, and WILL NOT be remembered:
As far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us. (Ps 103:12)
“I, even I, am He who BLOTS OUT your transgressions for My own sake; and I WILL NOT REMEMBER YOUR SINS. ” (Isaiah 43:25).
Jeremiah received this joyful message: “I will forgive their iniquity, and THEIR SIN WILL I REMEMBER NO MORE. ” (Jeremiah 31:34).
Can you read, O pharisee?
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES unto them (2 Cor 5:19).”
&
“Not enough? Here’s a few more:
Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the FAITH OF GOD’S ELECT and THEIR knowledge of the truth. (Titus 1:1)
I have manifested Your name to the men whom YOU GAVE ME out of the world. THEY were Yours and You GAVE them to Me, and they have kept Your word. (John 17:6)
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on WHOM I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on WHOM I will have compassion. So then it is not of HIM that willeth, nor of HIM that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. (Romans 9:15-16)
Therefore hath He mercy on WHOM he will have mercy, and WHOM he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For WHO hath resisted His will? Nay but, O MAN, who art THOU that repliest against God? Shall the THING FORMED say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made ME thus? (Romans 9:18-20)
that He might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which HE HAD BEFORE PREPARED UNTO GLORY, Even US, WHOM He hath called, not of the Jews only, but ALSO OF THE GENTILES. (Romans 9:23-24)
For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God ACCORDING TO ELECTION might stand, not of works, but of HIM THAT CALLETH.(Rom 9:11)
And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved. But for the ELECT’S sake, WHOM HE HATH CHOSEN, He hath shortened the days. (Mark 13:20)
We know that all things work together to those who love God, for those who ARE CALLED according to HIS purpose. For WHOM He did foreknow, He also did PREDESTINE to be conformed to the image of his Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover WHOM He did predestinate, THEM He also called: and WHOM He called, THEM He also justified: and WHOM He justified, THEM He also glorified. (Romans 8:28-30)
Will not God bring about justice for HIS ELECT who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them? I tell you that He will bring about justice for THEM quickly. (Luke 18:7-8)
Who shall lay any thing to the charge of GOD’S ELECT? IT IS GOD that justifieth. (Romans 8:33)
even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to ALL WHOM YOU HAVE GIVEN HIM, He may GIVE eternal life. (John 17:2)
And the Lord said unto him, Go thy way, for he is a CHOSEN VESSEL unto Me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel. (Acts 9:15)
WHO HAS SAVED US, and CALLED US with an holy CALLING, not according to our works, but according to HIS OWN PURPOSE AND GRACE, which was GIVEN US in Christ Jesus BEFORE the world began. (2nd Tim 1:9)
They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are CALLED AND CHOSEN AND FAITHFUL. (Rev. 17-14)
To him the doorkeeper opens, and the SHEEP hear His voice; and He CALLS HIS OWN sheep BY NAME and leads them out. And when He brings out HIS OWN sheep, He goes before THEM; and the SHEEP follow Him, for THEY know His voice. (John 10:3-4)
Just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life FOR THE SHEEP. (John 10:15)
Knowing brethren beloved by God, HIS CHOICE of you. (1st Thess 1:4)
And you hath HE MADE ALIVE, who were DEAD in trespasses and sins. (Eph 2:1)
All things are delivered to Me from my Father, and no man knoweth who the Son is but the Father, and who the Father is, but the Son, and HE TO WHOM THE SON WILL REVEAL HIM. (Luke 10:22)
Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the ELECTION OF GRACE. (Rom 11:5)
For many are called, but few CHOSEN. (Matt 20:16)
for it is GOD WHO WORKS IN YOU both to WILL and to DO for HIS GOOD PLEASURE. (Philippians 2:13)
BEFORE I formed you in the womb I KNEW YOU. Before you were born I SANCTIFIED YOU. (Jeremiah 1:5)
A man can receive NOTHING unless it has been GIVEN TO HIM FROM HEAVEN. (John 3:27)
But YOU are a CHOSEN generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, HIS OWN special people, that you may proclaim the praises of HIM WHO CALLED YOU out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God (1st Pet 2:9-10)
Concerning the antichrist – “the dwellers on earth whose names have not BEEN WRITTEN in the book of life FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. (Rev 17:8) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names ARE NOT WRITTEN in the book of life of the Lamb slain FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.” (Rev 13:8)
Then shall He send His angels, and shall gather together HIS ELECT from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. (Mark 13:27)
Having PREDESTINED US unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of HIS WILL, to the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein HE hath MADE US ACCEPTED in the beloved. (Eph 1:5-6)
BUT GOD, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved US, even when we were DEAD in trespasses, MADE US ALIVE together with Christ (by GRACE you have been saved). (Eph 2:4-5)
Therefore I endure all things for the ELECT’S sake, that THEY may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with ETERNAL glory. (2nd Tim 2:10)
His divine power has GIVEN TO US all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of HIM WHO CALLED US. (2nd Peter 1:3)
For the gifts and THE CALLING OF GOD are irrevocable (Romans 11:29)
For by grace YOU HAVE BEEN saved, through faith, and that NOT of yourselves it is the GIFT OF GOD. (Eph 2:8)
ELECT according to the FOREKNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, through sanctification of the Spirit (1st Pet 1:2).
In whom we also HAVE OBTAINED an inheritance, being PREDESTINED according to the PURPOSE OF HIM who worketh all things after the counsel of HIS OWN WILL. (Eph 1:11)
Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make YOUR CALLING AND ELECTION sure, for if you do these things you will NEVER stumble. (2nd Pet 1:10).
It is SOOO sad that unlearned people say they hate “Calvinism”, when in fact what they hate is God’s Divine Election and the fact that scripture teaches in BOTH testaments that Salvation is NOT of man, salvation is of the Lord.”
&
“It’s so sad when people hide behind someone else’s post. It’s also a shame that too many don’t know that, scripturally speaking, “all” and “world” do not mean all and world without distinction.
“Christ was offered once to bear the sins of MANY”. (Heb 9:28).
In case you’re new to language, “many” does NOT mean “all”. Does it? Well then, your whole post has been shown to be complete nonsense.
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for MANY for the remission of sins. (Matthew 26:28).
DOES THAT SAY ALL??
DOES IT?
John 14:26 says clearly, “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you ALL things”.
I’ve been a believer 35 years and He still hasn’t taught me nuclear physics or micro biology. So MAYBE, just maybe, ALL doesn’t mean all, as Arminians say it MUST.
“World” and “All” in most instances in the NT, by context, means both Jews and Gentiles – NOT every person in the world without distinction.
“Kosmos” (world) has more than 7 meanings in the New Testament alone. You have to be very careful with the words “all” and “world” in the NT.
Jesus said, speaking to the jews, “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men to Myself.” (John 12:32). Have ALL men been drawn to Jesus? No, they haven’t. “All” here means both jews and gentiles, not EVERY person.
Take this example. “Then the Pharisees said to one another, “You can see that this is doing you no good. Look how the WHOLE WORLD has gone after Him!” (John 12:19).
Did the whole world go after Jesus? No, they certainly did not. They crucified Him.
This is important. Take 1st John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” Is the whole world saved? Are all saved, without distinction?
The Bible is clear that NOT all are saved.
While John was clear that this power of Jesus’ sacrifice was made available to all people of the world, and sufficient to save all, it is only accessed by grace through faith. Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient to pay the debt for anyone who comes to faith in Him (Rev 22:17). There is a distinction between Christ’s power to (potentially) save all people and those who actually come to Him for salvation.
Back to John 3:16: “For God so loved the world…”
This doesn’t meant that every person will actually be saved, they won’t. Nor does it mean God chooses all. The word “world” does not mean EVERY person, without distinction, but, as the verse clearly teaches, it’s only accessible to “whosoever believeth”.
Do ALL believeth? Not even close.
So Arminians trying to use “all” and “world” to disprove definite (limited) atonement shows how superficial their knowledge base of the scripture truly is.”
Hello Jeff
That post was so very long – there is no way anyone is going to bother reading through all of it.
.
You ask the question about the way the Calvinist reads scripture.
.
The answer to that question – is really not peculiar to Calvinists
Calvinists are human – just as Jehovah’s witness and Mormons etc are human.
.
When one has a theology that one must affirm, it goes without saying, scripture is going to be co-opted in order to affirm that theology.
.
Of course the Calvinist is going to insist that his theology comes from scripture.
But the Jehovah’s Witness and the Mormon etc make the exact same claim.
That claim is about as probable as any human being infallible!!!
.
I remember a lecture from Dr. Gordon Fee on the topic of how the human mind interprets scripture.
The question he poses to his seminary students is “WHAT INFORMS THE MIND WHILE IT IS READING THE TEXT?”
.
The human mind interprets all data in accordance to what it holds as unquestionable truth.
.
Many years ago – people believed the sun orbits around the earth.
They held that as unquestionable truth.
Those people were not going to accept any interpretation of scripture that would contradict what they held as unquestionable truth.
.
So you can see the limitations the human mind brings to the table – when it comes to how the mind interprets the data of scripture.
.
Calvinism – is a system of “teaching – teaching – teaching – teaching – teaching”
Calvinist ministers are first and foremost teachers of the doctrine.
.
The Calvinist mind soon becomes conditioned to embrace EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as unquestionable truth.
.
When the Calvinist mind becomes sufficiently conditioned – it is not going to accept any interpretation of scripture which contradicts what it holds as unquestionable truth.
.
One of the key weaknesses of the Calvinist interpretation of scripture is the degree to which it is SELF-CONTRADICTING.
.
.
REMEMBER:
1) The doctrine stipulates -not the slightest movement of one atomic particle can happen – unless that movement is decreed by a decree that is infallible.
.
2) An infallible decree does not grant any *ALTERNATIVE* from that which it decrees
.
3) Therefore – there is no such thing as an *ALTERNATIVE* within creation – from that which is decreed.
.
4) Since every human event and every human impulse is decreed by a decree that does not grant existence to any *ALTERNATIVE* from that which is decreed – it follows – *NO ALTERNATIVES* exist within creation – and within the human brain.
.
5) This means – the Calvinist does not have CHOICE between *ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS* on the matter of anything – simply because an infallible decree does not grant existence to *ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS*
.
6) If it is decreed that Calvinist_A will perform SIN_X at TIME_T that decree is infallible and does not grant existence to any *ALTERNATIVE*.
.
7) Accordingly – Calvinist_A does not have a CHOICE in the matter – simply because *NO ALLITERATIVE* exists for Calvinist_A to choose.
.
8) This is a *HUGE PROBLEM* for the Calvinist – because on a moment by moment basis – he assumes
(A) ALTERNATIVES exist
(B) He has CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
(C) That CHOICE is *UP TO* him.
.
None of those things are possible – because an infallible decree does not grant existence to any *ALTERNATIVE*
.
.
What you start to realize then – is the Calvinist cannot live according to his doctrine
He must treat his doctrine *AS-IF* it is FALSE
.
A critical problem then for the Calvinist – is that he holds his doctrine is what scripture teaches.
.
But he is forced to treat his doctrine *AS-IF* it is FALSE in order to retain a sense of human NORMALCY
.
CONCLUSION:
The Calvinist relationship to scripture – is that he treats scripture *AS-IF* what it teaches is FALSE.
.
Let me know if you are able to follow the logic of that – and understand how the conclusion is true.
.
Blessings!
The person also typed
“The scripture teaches plainly that election and grace make a
DEAD MAN willing
Scripture is CLEAR that men are DEAD in trespasses and sins.
Dead Men will nothing .
Scripture is clear.”
The person quoted
1st Corinthians 2:14 and said
“Translation, You cannot
“free will” yourself to God”
Saying also
“free-willer Arminians run out of options suddenly try to make it
synergistic , my will plus God, just Not his Will”
The person also mentioned the many parts of the Bible
Old & New Testaments where it says
“Salvation is of the Lord” and quoted the Bible verses
Ezekiel 34:11
John 6:44 , Acts 13:48, John 17:2
John 17:6, John 17:9 , John 6:37 ,
John 6:65, John 15:16
Philippians 2:13
2nd Thess 2:13-14
2nd Thess 2:1
Romans 9:18
Acts 2:47 from the 1611 King James Version
Psalm 65:4
Galatians 1:15 ,
Ephesians 1:4
Romans 1:7
John 10: 27-29
Galatians 1:6
and quoted Romans 9:16 in
the King James Version
br.d
Jeff – here is some wisdom for you.
Whenever anyone tells you “The scripture clearly teaches [INSERT MY DOCTRINE HERE] ”
.
That is a dead-giveaway that that person is either ignorant or is dishonest.
.
Over the years – I have seen Calvinists quote scripture verses and claim those verses clearly teach something
And under scrutiny you discover they are *FORCING* concepts into a given verse which do not exist in that verse.
.
Did you know – the scripture says “A fool believes every word”
Do you want to play the fool?
.
Lets say someone claims you committed a murder
Do you simply believe that claim.
.
The scripture tells you to “Examine all things and hold fast to that which is good”
How can you *EXAMINE* a claim someone makes – if you simply blindly believe whatever they say?
.
Of course – Calvinists are going to have scripture verses
Jehovah’s Witnesses have scripture verses – do you believe their claims?
Mormons have scripture verses – do you believe their claims?
.
If you are not a critical thinker – you are going to be fooled by people.
.
If you watch Dr. Flower’s Youtube videos – you will see Dr. Flowers *EXAMINE* the claims of Calvinists and show how those claims collapse under their own weight.
.
Do you know how to recognize SELF-CONTRADICTIONS?
IF a Calvinist claims [X] is TRUE with one verse – and then claims [X] is FALSE with another verse – would you know how to recognize the CONTRADICTION – which means that Calvinist’s claims cannot possibly be TRUE.
.
Please learn how to think critically.
Please don’t play the fool and believe every claim a Calvinist will make simply because he bangs his fist on a table when he speaks.
.
I am concerned for you – that you are too easily manipulated.
My prayer for you is that you will learn to think *LOGICALLY* so you can identify and not be fooled by claims that are *FALLACIOUS* and *SELF-REFUTING*
.
In love
br.d
Jeff – in my response to you this morning I mentioned my concern for you about you being manipulated.
.
And I don’t believe it is a coincidence that Kevin Thompson’s (Youtube channel – Beyond The Fundamentals) released a video this afternoon which is titled: “How Calvinistic Framing Can Manipulate You”
.
I don’t believe this is a coincidence!
The Lord arranged this!!
.
I would ask you to watch Kevin’s Youtube video.
Go to Youtube and search for the title
.
“How Calvinistic Framing Can Manipulate You”
.
blessings
br.d
br.d
Jeff – if you want to see an example of Calvinist SELF-CONTRADICTION
Watch Dr. Flower’s video which is titled:
John MacArthur Contradicts Calvinism | Dr. Leighton Flowers | Soteriology 101
.
There is actually more than SELF-CONTRADICTION in this case
John MacAuthur is additionally committing a “Lie of omission” in this case.
.
A “Lie of Omission” is communication designed to mislead – by the strategy of omitting critical facts – which if not omitted would not mislead.
.
this will be a little test for you – to see if you can discern where MacArthur is committing the “Lie of Omission”
.
I’m happy to help you out – if you are not able to discern it by yourself.
.
blessings
br.d
I wonder what is the True and
Correct Interpretation, View of
Romans Chapter 9 , since that Chapter is used often to Support Calvinism, how many interpretations are there total of
Romans 9
br.d
If you haven’t seen it yet – check out Kevin Thompson’s Youtube presentation which is titled:
Romans 9 and Calvinist Mental Framing
.
His Youtube channel is “Beyond The Fundamentals”
.
blessings!
About the Bible & Universalism
A Christian named Bob Evely typed to me back in 2011 regarding a book he wrote titled
“At the End of the Ages…The Abolition of Hell”
“If you look at my book once again, I believe I address this in the section on “The Eons.” We can see in the various ways in which “aion” is used that there appear to be five distinct eons — two still to come. And then we have the conclusion of the eons — the time after the eons. So God existed before the eons began — there are then five periods of time (eons), about which God reveals things to us in His Word — and then the time after the eons have concluded (we might call it eternity). There are so many variations of the word “aion” (again, refer to my book), and I know some who try to refute universalism will try to tell us that “eons of the eons” actually means “ages tumbling upon ages, an expression of eternity.” But from examining every context where every variation of “aion” occurs we see that this is simply not the case — else why sometimes “aion” in the singular, sometimes plural, sometimes “eon of the eon”, sometimes “eons of the eons”, etc. Was God simply sloppy when He provided His revelation to us? I think not. I believe there is a unique concept God is revealing with each of these variations.”
“When Jesus speaks of the narrow gate, we must remember His earthly ministry was entirely directed to Israel. In that time He came to talk about the restoration of the kingdom unto Israel, as had been promised by the Old Testament prophets. Entrance to the kingdom in that era was works-based, not faith-based. And we learn that Israel was not able to meet the works-based requirements for righteousness. But when Israel learned this, God showed that what was not possible with men was possible with God — and He introduced, thru Paul, the evangel (gospel) of faith-alone. There is MUCH more I could say about this, but the best I can offer is the suggestion that you pay very close attention to who various parts of Scripture were directed to, and “rightly divide” between the gospel proclaimed to Israel in the era of Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the gospel proclaimed to the body of Christ that was proclaimed thru Paul. There are many differences. And those that try to force the Israel-focused passages upon the body of Christ today make huge errors in many types of doctrine.”
” When you wrote to me a long time ago I looked briefly at the Matt Slick carm.org web site, and recall it being like so many other web sites and books I have seen that attempt to refute universalism. I pretty much know the arguments used, since they are all basically the same. Look at the Bible as a whole, and when God says something believe it — and there is no need to try and refute universalism. To do so is, in my opinion, blaspheme. God is all wise, all loving, all powerful — He clearly tells us His will to save all — He clearly shows us He will indeed save all — yet so many try to show that this is not the case, mostly by twisting words (all does not really mean all) or ignoring details in God’s revelation (like the variations of the word “aion”). God is all wise, all loving and all powerful — yet many go to great lengths to show that Satan’s will or the stubborn will of man will overcome God’s will and desire. Sorry I don’t have time to look in great length at Matt Slick’s web site, but I have little time to be “reactive” in reading the many who try to refute what God has clearly said — as I am trying to be “proactive” in my own studies (currently working on Romans).
” The famous evangelist G. Campbell Morgan said it best — there is no word in all of the Scriptures that means eternal or endless. I think we have a desire to know about eternity — yet God has chosen to reveal things to us that pertain primarily to the ages or eons — terminable period of time. I suppose the closest we come is when God speaks of the kingdom that will not end, or a time referred to as the conclusion of the eons. These give us glimpses of eternity. I know that those professing eternal torment will say that since no other word expresses eternity, “eon” must do so — but I ask, is it NECESSARY that the Scriptures tell us about eternity, or is that just our human tendency to want to know everything about everything, when perhaps God would have us trust Him for certain unrevealed details? I have not, in my studies, found a word that can be translated “eternal” — and most certainly that word is not “aion” in any of its many variations.”
Plus the website
screenrant.com has an article headlined
“Captain Kirk’s “Death” Proves a Truly Dark Fact About Star Trek’s Entire Universe” by
Shaun Corley on June 26, 2024
This article mentions The Fictional Star Trek Universe, the topic of Predestination is mentioned
Can we relate this screenrant.com article to our Calvinism & Univesalism debate
It’s Very sad how many people just cannot be very Successful or Happy in this current Earthly Life
Because they have bad heredity, genetics, bad parenting, bad upbringing, bad environment, competition for Resources from other people, traumatic events in their life ,
Some people just cannot be very Successful or Happy in this current
Earthly Life, for many Various Reasons , no matter what they do while other people are Very Successful and Happy in this Brief Earthly Life ,
It’s almost like it is the Destiny, and Fate of some people to Not be very Successful or Happy, that they were predestined to fail , and they feel jealous and envious of people who are Successful and Happy
It’s so Unjust and Unfair, This current Earthly Life has the
Haves and Have Nots. Some have said Determinism is True and that it’s very difficult for people to just
“Improve Themselves” that success or Failure is in a person’s DNA ,
People are the way they are , and very little can be done to change that . Many people are Not Successful or Happy in this Life because of a Severe Mental and/or Physical Condition , and things beyond their control, the nature vs nurture debate
I’m Not trying to Negatively Stereotype the disabled, make generalizations or paint with a broad brush.
Since Not Everyone can be Successful or Happy in this Brief Earthly Life, at least when these
Less Fortunate Unsuccessful people ultimately pass away and go to Heaven, At Least Then in Heaven and the New Earth they should definitely have the Happiness and Success they were unable to Achieve in their brief Earthly Life, at least that
At least that
No one deserves to be unhappy and miserable for all Eternity
br.d
Hey Jeff
I think its fair to say – the preponderance of Christians down through time have rejected Universalism.
And I think you have already observed it as held by a very small number of people.
.
That would make it the case – that those who embrace it – are the only ones who correctly understand scripture.
Which would make it the case that the preponderance of Christians down through time – did not correctly understand scripture.
.
Those are a few points which one would have to acknowledge as logical conclusions if Universalism is true.
.
BTW: Happy 4th of July! :-]
Blessings!
br.d
Jeff, a couple things about something Bob Evely wrote to you: “He clearly tells us His will to save all…yet so many try to show that this is not the case, mostly by twisting words…”
If I remember correctly, the concordance defines the word “will (noun)” (as in “It’s God’s will that all men are saved, that none perish”) as God’s preferred plans, what He wants to have happen. But the guy who wrote to you uses it like “God’s predetermined, irresistible plans,” twisting the word “will (noun).”
But biblically, God wants all men to be saved. But that doesn’t mean He forces all men to be saved. It’s just His preferred plan, His desire. But He lets everyone decide for themselves.
And Bob also said “God is all wise, all loving and all powerful — yet many go to great lengths to show that Satan’s will or the stubborn will of man will overcome God’s will and desire.”
Question: If God is supposedly going to save everybody in the end anyway, then what is Satan willing or accomplishing? What his purpose or goal? What effect can he have on anything? Just wondering how Bob would answer that.
br.d
I think you are right on target to be questioning what Calvinists mean by the words they use.
The fact that Calvinists rely so heavily on deceptive language tactics is an extremely critical aspect of Calvinism which NON-Calvinists do not even start to comprehend – simply because a Christian does not anticipate deceptive language tactics from another professing Christian.
.
It generally takes NON-Calvinists a very long time – and a great deal of frustrating dialog with Calvinists before it first dawns on them – the Calvinist is using strategically misleading language. If that NON_Calvinist pursues it – they will eventually come to realize – strategically misleading language is something every Calvinist is taught – because strategically misleading language is built into – and is integral to the Calvinist social structure.
.
Once a NON-Calvinist recognizes that aspect of Calvinism – they will learn to examine every statement a Calvinist makes – trying to figure out if it is strategically designed to mislead.
.
So you are wise to pursue that course!
.
Blessings!
br.d
Brdmod: “Once a NON-Calvinist recognizes that aspect of Calvinism – they will learn to examine every statement a Calvinist makes – trying to figure out if it is strategically designed to mislead.”
Totally! And it’s what makes Calvinism so frustrating and so difficult to deal with.
Jeff, it sounds to me like the Captain Kirk article (unless it is your words – I can’t tell) is trying to use people’s feelings as the basis for determining if there is a hell or not, if universalism is true or not, as if suggesting that miserable and unsuccessful people deserve heaven. And I can’t think of a flimsier thing to base God’s Word/heaven/hell on than people’s feelings.
And I think it’s a huge stretch to say that certain people are destined to be miserable and unsuccessful in this life and to use that to support the idea that they somehow “deserve” heaven later, that there shouldn’t be a hell because some people have miserable lives. In an earthly example, that’s kinda like saying that if someone mopes around and focuses on all the bad things that happen and all the ways they fail and all the things they don’t get and can’t do, then we should all be required to restructure everything to make them happy and successful. It’s making a person’s feelings the center of the universe. And what a mess that would be theologically and on earth. Our feelings and the circumstances of our lives should not dictate what is true about God and eternity and His Word.
But I do agree that life is unfair and unjust. So thank God that He is fair and just and gives everyone a chance to be saved and He will right all wrongs in the end.
Personally, I think God doesn’t want anyone to suffer for eternity either, which is why He made a way for us to get to heaven and why He reaches out to all. But He also gave us the choice about if we want to be with Him eternally or not because He wants to spend eternity with people who want to be with Him, not who are forced to. Love that’s forced or coerced is not true love. And so He had to provide us with a choice, with free-will. And sadly, many will decide that they’d rather live without Him, that they’d be happier without Him (at least they think they will). And in the end, He will give them what they want. (If people would rather be their own god than worship the God of the Bible, do you think they’d be happy being forced into a relationship with Him?)
Just some thoughts. But I think you’re allowing people’s feelings and the circumstances of life to determine what’s true and what’s not. (But maybe I’m wrong.) Blessings!
Jeff, one more thought:
Shouldn’t the fact that some people have miserable lives full of tragedy and evil – violence, abuse, mistreatment, war, hate, etc. – be support for the idea of hell? If there was no hell, if everyone automatically went to heaven in the end, then all wicked people would get away with all the evil things they’ve done to others. People would do any evil thing they want, never repent, and still get rewarded with heaven. And so there would be no real justice.
And if God is not just, then He’s not really loving either because He’d be showing no real concern for those hurt by others. If there was no hell, if God didn’t punish unrepentant sin, if He rewarded it with heaven instead, then He’d be neither just nor loving, and we couldn’t trust a God like that.
br.d , Thanks but what about my other points made in my above comment of
JULY 4, 2024 AT 10:46 AM
Such as that sadly Many people just cannot be very Successful or Happy in this brief Earthly Life
They are Miserable, and if they can Never be Very Happy or Successful in this Earthly Life, at Least in
Heaven at Least in Heaven and the New Earth Everyone should be Happy and Successful, at least that, at least that .
Please re-read my above comment of JULY 4, 2024 AT 10:46 AM
I hate to be a pest or all OCD about it
Many people in this Life who are unhappy, Unsuccessful , Less Fortunate and Miserable, even in their sleep, even in their sleep they are often tormented by Horrible
Nightmares and bad dreams
Waking up crying
br.d
Hi Jeff
Would a person who is having those difficulties consider seeing a therapist for help?
There may be underlying reasons for it – which the person may not recognize
And if they were able to discover those underlying reasons – they could quite possibly discover how to counter those issues.
.
Many years ago I listened to a lecture by a therapist who described various types of issues his patients had which were very similar to what you describe.
.
The strategy behind the therapy is one of discovery.
Once the person discovers the underlying issues
Or perhaps they discover a propensity they have which triggers a downward spiral.
Then they discovered there were things they could do to counter that propensity
And from that point on they were able to prevent the downward spiral
.
Would the person you are speaking about be willing to try that approach?
I think the key to those types of situations – is often to find people who are caring – but also who have the ability to be of help. And who are willing to walk side-by-side with a person in the process.
.
Blessings!
br.d
br.d , Some of those people I mentioned are seeing Therapists for
Professional Help and it only helps them somewhat, they are often still unable have the success and happiness they want in this Life
Also to Heather, my comment
of JULY 4, 2024 AT 10:46 AM , What about Faithful Christians in this current Earthly Life who for Various Reasons are unable to be Very Successful or Happy and have the the Types of decent lives they want and need. If they are decent Saved Christians with a good heart, when they ultimately pass away, & go to Heaven, they should be able to have the Happiness and Success that they were unable to obtain in their Earthly Lives, it’s Not about being “Entitled”
It’s about no one should be Miserable, unhappy and unsuccessful in Heaven and the New Earth , otherwise what type of Heaven would that be ?
If they are in Heaven, why would God just allow them to be Miserable, unhappy and Unsuccessful Forever
Jeff, what do you think heaven is like? Are you saying you think it’s possible to for Christians in heaven to be miserable for all of eternity? If so, where did you get this idea from?
I believe the Bible says that God will get rid of all sin, misery, death, pain, tears, etc., in eternal heaven. And so no Christian will be miserable for all of eternity.
(FYI, my pervious comment about “entitled” people was not about if miserable Christians should be entitled to heaven, but about if miserable people in general should be entitled to heaven just because they are miserable. I thought that’s what your point was – that people with bad lives should get a good eternity, that there shouldn’t be a hell because people have bad enough lives on earth. Or something like that. It’s hard to tell in your comments what you’re saying and what you’re quoting and what questions you’re asking.)
br.d
Hi Jeff,
For me – over the years – I have had my challenges.
And I have personally discovered a key component of what the Lord uses for me is information.
Many instances in which I am faced with a challenge – my understanding of the particulars within that situation is not an accurate understanding.
.
Remember the serpent in the garden who introduced Eve to new thoughts.
Prior to being introduced to those thoughts – Eve was in a contented state.
The thoughts the serpent introduced to Eve – made her discontented.
That discontent produced within Eve the belief that she had a need and she was lacking.
But that perception of a need and that perception of lack was based on the thoughts the serpent gave her.
The serpent gave her those thoughts in order to produce a perception of lack and of need.
.
Jesus tells us “You shall know the truth – and the truth shall set you free”
.
So over the years – when I am faced with different challenges.
Some of those challenges were overwhelming to me.
And some of those challenges brought me to a state of despair.
.
But the saving grace for me has always been the Lord
I would go to the Lord and ask him to give me insight and understanding
And he would always be faithful to answer those prayers
But in most cases it would take time.
I did not come to have understand and insight that I needed right away
The Lord needed to put me through circumstances that would enable me to realize what he wanted me to understand.
.
I also discovered that I need to be pro-active in this process
I need to advance my learning
.
The scripture says “In all of your ways get understanding”
This is an instruction from scripture – to be *ACTIVE* in a pursuit of understanding.
.
The scripture says “A king will search out a matter”
So the scripture is telling us that we need to be *ACTIVE* in searching for understanding.
.
So I would very strongly point you to the Lord and to ask him to give you understanding on the subject of happiness.
.
You might consider watching a Youtube video that is titled “Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness”
He explains what he means by Positive Psychology
It basically the fact that a large percentage of the study of Psychology has been focused on the nature of human disabilities.
.
So Positive Psychology is the study of subjects like the nature of happiness
.
I hope this helps!
blessings!
br.d
Heather & br.d
Some have said that the famous
“Law of Attraction” of is pseudoscientific , while others have said that there is some truth to it and
That if a person is negative or thinks negative, poorly of themselves that it sadly leads to bad things happening to the person, a self fulfilling prophecy , that others people can sense when a person is miserable or unhappy
Remember the famous book
“The Power of Positive Thinking” by Norman Vincent Peale
Some have said that book may have some Truth to it , but it’s mostly Non-Sense
For many people it’s very difficult for them to just
“think positive” especially if they have a Mental illness
Loneliness, Chronic Loneliness is a Very Serious Problem in America and Worldwide , many Lonely people who lack Love, Companionship and Relationships in their lives are tormented by horrible bad dreams and Nightmares in their Sleep
In Heaven and the New Earth , No one should be Lonely Forever,
There is too Much Loneliness in this World already
Human Beings need other Human Beings, for Friendships, Companionship, Relationships
Life is horribly, Cruel, Unjust and Unfair for Countless people
I know people who became disabled at very young ages from
Mental and/or Physical Conditions
Making it difficult and often impossible for them to work
They are still alive and living, breathing but they gave up on their hopes and dreams, it’s like Life gave up on them first and in Return they then gave up on Life, they are living and breathing but they don’t care anymore about their hopes and dreams, they are Miserable in many ways
Why did God and/or nature make some people very attractive and with great personalities, while other people are unattractive and with dull , boring personalities
Not Everyone can just improve themselves or pull themselves up from the bootstraps
br.d
Hi Jeff
You have probably also heard the saying “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”
And you’ve probably heard it said “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure”
.
I think you will find – a person who is considered attractive in one society may not be considered attractive in a different society.
.
So attractiveness within a society is a product of that societies social structure
.
We also have the reality of Lucifer who hates people
And he does everything he can to destroy the happiness of people
He does this by influencing their thinking – just as he did with Eve in the garden
That is why we see all of the craziness in our society today having to do with men and women
.
But there is Jesus who loves you!
And he desires your well-being
He desires you to be blesses – and fulfilled
.
So there are two competing factors
The enemy of mankind is out like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour – seeking to influence people in order to destroy their lives and their happiness.
.
And there is Jesus who says – You shall know the truth – and the truth shall set you free.
.
Keep your eyes on Jesus Jeff!
Make Jesus the first place in your life.
.
He makes streams in the desert – a way in the wilderness
The waters they parted – and there was dry land.
He makes streams in the desert – a way in the wilderness
Just don’t let go of his hand!
.
One thing about you that the Lord has done in your life that I am very glad about
The Lord has made you a sincere and kind person.
Keep looking to him!!!
He will never betray you.
He will always be faithful!
.
Blessings!
ur frnd
br.d
br.d
Yesterday a person from the
Calvinist Christian website
carm.org said to me via email about Dr. Leighton Flowers and this website
soteriology101.com and it’s Arguments against Calvinism that
“If you go to our website at: carm.org and type in “Calvinism” in the search bar, numerous articles will show up.
You can take a look at an article that addresses your question. The main thing to remember is that Calvinism, like Arminianism, is
a theological viewpoint upon which denominations were established. These viewpoints are not the “be-all to end-all,” and are
by no means infallible. There are strengths and weaknesses in each of the positions.
If one of the articles fails to address a particular point that you are questioning, write us back and we will address it specifically.
I can tell you this though, having looked at this website before, the author utilizes poor scholarship, and it seems his emphasis
is on selling books. This doesn’t invalidate in and of itself any of his arguments, but he is a “hyper accuser,” against those
who disagree with his position. This is a genuine expression of the lack of Christian grace, and does nothing but continue
to attempt to divide the Body of Christ.”
What do you think about that
carm.org statement ?
Often myself and other people don’t know who or what to believe, not just about the Bible, Theology and Doctrines, Biblical Interpretation, but about Current Events in America and Worldwide, it’s so Frustrating and Confusing
Jeffrey, you seem to be on the right path to truth. Pray for the holy spirit to guide you. Ask but question the answers of all men. Here is a question I suggest you ask yourself as well as God, requesting the holy spirit guide you to truth.
— Does God sent people to hell for not believing in something they were born incapable of believing in?
I suspect non-Calvinist can give you a simple reply (i.e. No) as I do to you now. Then ask this of carm.org. I’d be curious if they can do the same with a Yes or No or if they will have to nuance their reply leaving you confused.
br.d
Hello Larry and welcome
.
One thing that is critical to recognize with Calvinist – is that the doctrine forces them to live *AS-IF* it is FALSE
.
This is because the foundational core of Calvinism is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD)
And it is impossible for a person to live COHERENTLY with Determinism – and at the same time retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
This is a pattern within Calvinism that is called *AS-IF* thinking
The Calvinist asserts his doctrine is TRUE and simultaneously treats the doctrine *AS-IF* it is FALSE
.
This *AS-IF* thinking patter within Calvinism – is what makes Calvinists DOUBLE-MINDED about the doctrine
.
Human language is the outward expression of human thought
And the outward expression of DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS is going to DOUBLE-SPEAK
.
And that is why Calvinist language – has perennially been observed as a language of DOUBLE-SPEAK
.
Calvinists will typically DENY and BACK-PEDAL the doctrine in the face of something they consider unpalatable.
So what we anticipate with Calvinists is that they will in most cases not be COHERENT with their own doctrine.
.
Blessings!
br.d
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
The phenomenon of a Calvinist being hyper antagonistic to anyone who disagrees has its roots in John Calvin himself.
.
John Calvin – during his day – was the sole and exclusive promoter and defender of his doctrine
And there were many Christian intellectuals in his day who disagreed with his doctrine because it is a doctrine of “Good-Evil”
.
Calvin derived the doctrine from his unquestioning adoration for all things Augustine
Augustine lived within the hierarchical system of the Roman Catholic church – at a period of time in which the church was adding to itself pretty much every prominent form of paganism.
.
English historian, Theodore Maynard, in The story of American Catholicism writes:
“It has often be charged… that Catholicism has been overlaid with many pagan incrustations.
Catholicism is ready to accept that charge – and to make it her boast.
The great god Pan is not really dead, he is baptized.”
.
.
Augustine did not baptize deities like Zeus and Pan into his theology
He baptized components of other religions into his theology
Two components which are totally unique to Calvinism are:
1) DUALISM – in which “Good” and “Evil” are Co-Equal, Co-Necessary, and Co-Complimentary
2) DETERMINISM – which is where Calvin gets his doctrine of decrees.
.
The DUALISM is derived from Gnosticism which was very prevalent in Augustine’s day
The DETERMINISM is derived from doctrines of Plotinus – a greek teacher whom Augustine adored.
.
These are the two components within Calvinism which have perennially made Calvinism controversial
.
So because of this DUALISM – Calvinism is a doctrine of “Good-Evil”
.
Now you can understand how Christian intellectuals in Calvin’s day would disagree with this.
.
And Calvin’s response to those people was to attack them and accuse them of various things.
.
Consequently – that has become a pattern for Calvinist behavior.
.
Blessings
br.d
br.d
Jeff – on the topic of Calvinists – ( Carm.org for example ) responding to Dr. FLowers
What you will find (if you learn how to discern it) is he Calvinist relying on DOUBLE-SPEAK.
.
DOUBLE-SPEAK is a ubiquitous part of Calvinist language.
Lies of Omission are also a very prominent part of Calvinist language.
.
A lie of omission – is communication designed to mislead – by the process of omitting *CRITICAL* facts – which if not omitted would not mislead.
.
The “T” in Calvinism’s TULIP for example – is designed to function as a Lie of Omission – and therefore designed to mislead.
.
.
Here are some quotes from numerous book authors on the subject of Calvinism’s DOUBLE-SPEAK
.
.
Dr. William Lane Craig
-quote
“The Calvinist, unfortunately, and yet consistently, will not enunciate the RADICAL DISTINCTIVES of his doctrine”
.
Dr. Jerry Walls
-quote:
“If Calvinists didn’t rely so heavily on misleading rhetoric, their theology would lose all credibility within two years.”
.
Norman Geisler
-quote:
“Some Calvinists use smoke-and-mirror tactics to avoid the harsh implications of their view” (pg 104)
“This is done by redefining terms and Theological Doublespeak” (pg 261)
.
Laurence M. Vance
-quote:
“The confusing labyrinth of Calvinist terminology” (pg 556)
.
Micah Coate
-quote:
“Calvinists arguments are buried in theological and grammatical DOUBLE-SPEAK.”
.
Ronnie W. Rogers
-quote
As mentioned in several places throughout this book, within Calvinism there is a problem of what I call DOUBLE-TALK. But I am not implying immoral or clandestine trickery. Nor am I suggesting conspiratorial deceit. I must admit that upon reflection on my time being a Calvinist, I did the same thing. I did not do this out ill motive or intent to deceive, or because of a lack of desire to be faithful to the scripture. Nor do I ascribe this to my Calvinist brothers. As a matter of fact, I did it because I believed Calvinism and the Scripture; and this brought about conflicts, or at least unconscious responses to the conflicts, which I now see as doubletalk. This doubletalk obscured the harsh realities of Calvinism and the inconsistencies between Scripture and Calvinism. ”
.
David L. Allen, Eric Hankins, and Adam Harwood
-quote
“This is a clear example of what I call Calvinism’s DOUBLE-TALK. By DOUBLE-TALK, I specifically and only mean thinking….speaking in such a way that obscures the disquieting realities of Calvinism. If a person accepts these realities, then he can be a knowledgeable and consistent Calvinist. But if one is unwilling to face them and accept them, he cannot be a consistent Calvinist. Additionally, I am not calling anyone a double-talker nor is my use of this term intended in any sense to be a pejorative.”
.
Gilbert Van-Order Jr
-quote
“Calvinists then have to resort to DOUBLE-TALK in order to explain how human responsibility is still involved even though it isn’t. If a man can do nothing to change his condition, then he cannot be held responsible for changing his condition”.
.
Ex-Calvinist Daniel Gracely
-quote:
“Calvinist and Non-Calvinist do not share the same meaning of words…..
Remember, Calvinism is merely the invoking of associative meaning, not real meaning.
By ‘not real’ I mean that the meaning is destroyed in the overall thought of the clause or sentence.
For, of course, at one level the Calvinist understands the general meaning of words.
But when he strings them together in such a way that it forms an idea that is false…
This is what I used to do as a Calvinist.
I liken these non-sense statements, or propositions, to the riding of a rocking horse…..
Thus, I would go back and forth in seesaw motion, lest on the one hand I find myself accusing God of insufficient sovereignty, or on the other hand find myself accusing God of authoring sin. All the while, there remained an illusion of movement towards truth, when in fact there was no real movement at all. At length I would allow the springs of dialectical tension to rest the rocking horse in the center, and then I would declare as harmonious propositions, which in fact, were totally contradictory to each other. Calvinist riders still ride out this scenario.”
.
Francis Hodgson
-quote:
“The apology for this gross misapplication of language…..is found in their distressing emergency.
In no other way can they, with any plausibility, meet their opponents.”
In a Zoom service last Sunday
The Pastor in his sermon mentioned how Fasting, Prayer,
Repentance can change God’s Mind
The Pastor mentioned the book of
Jonah and how God changed his mind , he mentioned
Jonah and the fish , whale
How can we apply this to our Calvinism debate ? Couldn’t God be Sovereign and yet Humans still have a certain degree of Free Will , or is Free Will an illusion as some claim , some claim that the Universe is a Giant Simulation, and that we are all living in it , like the 1999 movie “The Matrix”
Plus Another Pastor once
Mentioned the Bible verse
Psalm 119:89 in the King James Version
“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.” To Support the view that the King James Version of
1611 is the One and Only True
Bible , The King James Only Movement , what do we think of that Argument ?
Why do we suspect the
Calvinist method of interpreting the Bible is incorrect
br.d
Hi Jeff – good to hear from you!
.
On this topic – things are radically different in Calvinism than they are outside of Calvinism.
.
We need to remember the first principle in Calvinism
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
So you can see – in Calvinism – for any event to happen – that event must be decreed (predestined)
And that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees
.
Accordingly – every impulse that comes to pass within every human brain – is INFALLIBLY FIXED into an INFALLIBLE SCRIPT.
.
Calvinists have historically likened this to an author writing a book – where people in our world function as characters within the book *PERFORMING* what Calvin’s god has decreed them to INFALLIBLY DO.
.
An impulse cannot come to pass within the human brain at any instance in time OTHER than that impulse which was AUTHORED into the INFALLIBLE SCRIPT.
.
Since *EVERYTHING* without exception has been already written into an INFALLIBLE SCRIPT then humans simply function as *PERFORMERS* who are not granted any ALTERNATIVE.
.
Since ALTERNATIVES do not exist within creation – it follows – humans are not granted CHOICE in the matter of what they will be or do. They are not granted any CHOICE in the matter of what impulses will come to pass within their brains.
.
So on that model – the only reason you would pray – is if it was decreed that you would pray.
And you cannot call the prayer that you will pray YOUR prayer – because Calvin’s god AUTHORED it.
And you are not granted any CHOICE in the matter of whether you will pray it or not.
.
.
You can understand how radical these kinds of concepts get in Calvinism
.
Again – as I’ve described to you before – the Calvinist relies on a pattern of thinking called *AS-IF* thinking.
.
The Calvinist holds that everything is predetermined in every part – but he lives *AS-IF* NOTHING is predetermined.
.
So every Calvinist lives *AS-IF* the belief system is FALSE.
That is the way the Calvinist retains a sense of HUMAN NORMALCY within his belief system – due to how radical the belief system is.
.
We humans have a PERCEPTION of NORMAL human functionality – which includes ALTERNATIVES from which to choose from.
.
So we humans have a PERCEPTION of CHOICE-MAKING which does not exist in Calvinism.
.
The Calvinist cannot live coherently without that PERCEPTION of CHOICE-MAKING
So he goes about his office *AS-IF*
1) ALTERNATIVES exist for him to choose between
2) He is granted CHOICE between them
3) His CHOICE is *UP TO* him.
.
But the doctrine of decrees stipulates (1-3) above do not exist.
If any one of those (1-3) were to exist within creation it would falsify Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
Blessings!
br.d
YouTube has a video
Titled
“Why God didn’t destroy Satan after his rebellion! Finally clarity on this issue. Please watch this!”
By Anil Kanda Aug 30, 2024
It makes good points
br.d
Ok – I did watch it.
.
Did you notice how the host says “God values freedom of choice……without freedom of choice love just doesn’t exist”
.
This is what we’ve been looking at over and over with Calvinism – because this “Freedom of choice” that is being referred to here – is what is classified as LIBERTARIAN “Freedom”.
.
The critical components of LIBERTARIAN “Freedom” are:
1) The existence of ALTERNATIVE options (for example [SIN] vs [NOT SIN])
2) The ability to CHOOSE between those ALTERNATIVE options
3) That CHOICE being *UP TO* you
.
Calvinism’s foundational core is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as expressed within Calvin’s doctrine of decrees.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
.
So Calvinism represents a world in which *NOTHING* is permitted existence unless it is decreed
.
And that decree is infallible
And that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees
.
Thus – NO ALTERNATIVES are granted existence within creation.
Thus – NO ALTERNATIVES are available for humans to choose
Thus – humans are not granted CHOICE between ALTERNATIVES because they don’t exist for humans to choose
The very existence of any ALTERNATIVE within creation would falsify Calvin’s doctrine of decrees
.
So the most critical difference between Calvinism and all of its alternatives – is that it does not grant humans CHOICE.
.
In Calvinism – there is only one single choice-maker in the universe – and that is Calvin’s god.
.
Jeff – there is another youtube video in Anil Kanda list – I would ask you to watch.
The title is:
The Risk God Takes for Your Freedom: A Shocking Biblical Revelation!
.
I think you will be seriously blessed by it!
.
Blessings!
br.d
Thank you Br.d I was blessed by this video and it is very logical. And we know God is logical.
Blessings to you in Him alone we can stand🌻
Reggie
br.d
Thank you Reggie!
Yes – the Lord is wonderful!
.
The scripture says A FALSE balance is an abomination to the Lord
Obviously – that tells us – a balance cannot be both TRUE and FALSE at the same time – or that verse would be useless.
.
And that is what is called the “Principle of Bivalence” in logic.
So yes – you are correct – the Lord is very logical.
You shall know the TRUTH and the TRUTH shall set you free :-]
.
We continue to pray – the Lord will deliver our Calvinist friends from their mental ensarement.
Blessings!
Related to our Calvinism Debate
People often ask why does God allow Horrible Suffering to Happen in the World, why is there so Much
Evil, Suffering and Injustice in America and Worldwide
People often give the Reply
“God gives us Humans Free Will
, Humans have Free Will ”
Yet for Christians in Heaven and the New Earth
Since there will be No More Suffering in Heaven , or in our
Final Destination the New Earth
Since there will be No Suffering in Heaven and the New Earth
Saved Christians in Heaven and the New Earth will still have some
Degree of Free Will ,
Am I Right ? Christians in
Heaven and the New Earth will Not be like Robots or Puppets with No
Free Will , Also related to Calvinism and the Destiny , Fate of people in this Life
Some people are Not able to be
Very Happy or Successful in this life no matter how hard they try or what they do
They might have bad heredity, genetics, Environment, upbringing, tragic events in their lives
The old nature vs nurture debate
Why are some people blessed with Naturally Attractive looks, personalities, intelligence, Abilities, while others are unattractive, Not too intelligent, have dull , boring personalities , have to work very hard to accomplish the same things that for others are very easy to accomplish
And they feel jealous and envious of people who are Attractive, Happy and Successful, it’s so Unjust and Unfair , At least when these
Less Fortunate people ultimately pass away and go to Heaven and the New Earth , at least then they deserve to have the Happiness and Success they were unable to obtain in their Earthly Lives, at least that
No one deserves to be unhappy and miserable forever
Hello Jeff – I hope this finds you well!
.
To answer your current questions – let me take the highlights of them.
.
Jeff:
Related to our Calvinism Debate…Saved Christians in Heaven and the New Earth will still have some degree of Free Will….Am I Right?
.
br.d
As I have shown you many times before – Calvinism has a *DIFFERENT* definition for “Free Will” .
.
1) Creation is granted “Freedom” to BE/DO ONLY that which has been decreed
2) Nothing within creation is granted “Freedom” to BE/DO OTHER than that which was decreed.
.
3) For example – if it is decreed that you will rape elementary school girls:
– That decree grants you “Freedom” to rape elementary school girls – because that is what was decreed.
– That decree does NOT grant you “Freedom” to NOT rape elementary school girls – because that would be CONTRARY to the decree.
.
4) In Calvinism – that is the rule of divine sovereignty. And is applicable for all created things – whether on earth or in heaven.
.
5) Remember – an infallible decree never grants any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
.
OUTSIDE OF CALVINISM:
Outside of Calvinism – we don’t have the doctrine of decrees
.
Since there is no doctrine of decrees
1) ALTERNATIVES exist within creation and for created things
2) Humans have CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE is *UP TO* them
.
None of those (1-3) above exist within Calvinism – because their existence would falsify the doctrine of decrees.
.
.
Jeff:
Some people are Not able to be Very Happy or Successful in this life no matter how hard they try or what they do
.
br.d
In Calvinism – since ALTERNATIVES do not exist from that which is decreed – it follows – humans are not granted CHOICE in the matter – simply because NO ALTERNATIVE exists for them to choose.
.
Jeff:
And they feel jealous and envious of people who are Attractive, Happy and Successful, it’s so Unjust and Unfair
.
br.d
In Calvinism – you cannot have an impulse in your brain that is not decreed
So if the feeling of jealousy or envy comes to pass within your brain – then it was decreed – and that decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
.
Jeff:
No one deserves to be unhappy and miserable forever
.
br.d
In Calvinism – what you “deserve” is not determined by anything having to do with you
The doctrine stipulates the decree which determines what you “deserve” is -quote “Solely within himself, according to his good pleasure”.
.
Let me know if you were able to understand these answers
blessings!
See the latter part of 1 Cor 15. Flesh (Dirt Body) vs Spirit.
There won’t be evil in heaven to even choose from, or consider.
Isaiah 65:17
For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind
br.d , good to hear from you as well, what I’m saying is that in this current Earthly Life
Countless people are Lonely,
Socially Isolated, Miserable,
Depressed , etc.
None of that Misery should ever
Exist for anyone in Heaven and the New Earth
Since there is already too much Misery in this Earthly Life
It’s very sad that Many people are unable to be Successful or Happy in this Life because they have
Horrible crippling severe Mental and/or
Physical Conditions, living in
New York City, in Public I see people with these conditions all the time. At least in Heaven and the New Earth they should be Happy and Successful, what they were unable to be in their Earthly Lives
It’s Not about being
“Entitled” to anything
I feel that All Human Beings should have a decent Quality of Life
Plus a person typed on a
Christian Internet Group today
“Freewill is superficial. God determines everything in some way and in every situation. He gave us all characteristics to react in a certain way. He moulded us to act in a specific way. I am because God created me to be the way I am and I can not be any other way than what he has made of me.”
Jeff:
None of that Misery should ever Exist for anyone in Heaven and the New Earth Since there is already too much Misery in this Earthly Life…
Br.d
Jeff – yes I know that is what you said – but you specifically related that as “in our debate about Calvinism”
.
So here is Calvinism’s response to that
.
John Calvin
-quote
Before men are born their *LOT* is assigned to each of them by the secret will of god. (Calvin’s Bible Commentaries, 262–263)
.
In Calvinism you have a god who creates people for evil in order to service his “good pleasure”
.
So in Calvinism people are specifically created for misery
Calvin’s god glorifies himself and derives pleasure from your torment.
.
Jeff:
“Freewill is superficial. ……….God determines everything in some way
.
br.d
Jeff – that is Calvinist talk!
And your understanding of the subject is what is “superficial”
.
According to Determinism (aka Calvinism):
1) The reason a Jehovah’s Witness PERCEIVES JW doctrine as TRUE is because that PERCEPTION was pre-determined by Calvin’s god.
2) The reason a Mormon PERCEIVES Mormon doctrine as TRUE is because that PERCEPTION was pre-determined by Calvin’s god
3) The reason an Atheist PERCEIVES Atheism as TRUE is because that PERCEPTION was pre-determined by Calvin’s god
4) The reason a Satanist PERCEIVES satanism as TRUE is because that PERCEPTION was pre-determined by Calvin’s god
.
QUESTION
Are those PERCEPTIONS TRUTH-BASED?
.
I think your answer will be NO – they are not TRUTH-BASED
They are DECREE-BASED
.
QUESTION:
Are the brains of those people granted the ability to discern those PERCEPTIONS as FALSE?
.
I think your answer will be NO!
An infallible decree does not grant anything within creation to BE OTHER than that which was decreed
So the PERCEPTIONS in their brains are not granted the ability to BE OTHER than what was decreed.
.
In order for their brains to have the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE would require a state of affairs in which their PERCEPTIONS were not PRE-DETERMINED
That state of affairs would falsify Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
CONCLUSION:
In Determinism (aka Calvinism) every PERCEPTION (whether TRUE or FALSE) within every human brain has been PRE-DETERMINED – and cannot be other than what it was determined to infallibly be.
.
And the human brain (as shown in the examples above) is NOT PERMITTED to discern TRUE from FALSE
.
So if you want to adopt Determinism – then you have to accept the fact that your brain is not granted the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE on any matter.
.
Blessings!
br.d
A person from the Calvinist website carm.org typed via email to me this November 2024 after I asked the carm.org website to give their Rebuttal to Soteriology101.com and
Dr. Leighton Flowers
The person from carm.org typed
“I don’t know specifically what you might be referring to for “rebuttal,” as the denominational position of Calvinism encompasses
the total range of biblical theology, therefore I would need something specific to address.
However, I found this most revealing from the homepage of his website:
“Many have asked what specific points led me away from Calvinism. Being a Professor of Theology that once affirmed TULIP gives me a unique perspective on this subject. However, I do not claim to be an expert in the field nor do I begrudge those who disagree with my perspective.”
Let me get this straight:
1. He was led away from Calvinism.
2. He was a professor of theology affirming TULIP.
3. He does not claim to be an expert in the field.
4. Nor does he begrudge those who disagree with his perspective.
I find these statements to be truly amazing. He admits he was a professor yet he’s not an “expert” on the subject matter. Why in tarnations then
was he teaching theology about a subject in which he was not an expert? Didn’t he check out what the viewpoint consisted of by confirming it
with the Scriptures prior to teaching it? If he did not, then he compounded his error. If he did, but couldn’t find the Scripture verses to support
the position, he should never have affirmed it, and thus he would be committing another type of error. Imagine the “quality” lessons his students
must have received!
One of the reasons he fails so abysmally in debates is because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and can’t defend his criticisms against Calvinism.
In many cases like this, there’s usually more going on than meets the eye….
God Bless ”
The person from carm.org was quoting from what Dr. Flowers typed in his article on this site”
“The 5 points that led me to leave Calvinism”
Hi Jeff.
Here is a response for you
.
Calvinist:
Why in tarnations then was he teaching theology about a subject in which he was not an expert?
.
br.d
Because he was a Calvinist – and doing so is standard practice for Calvinists
I bump into this pretty much every time I bump into a Calvinist
It is quite common for Calvinists to speak EX-CATHEDRA
.
Assuming oneself to be “speaking with authority not as the scribes and Pharisees” as part of their spiritual inheritance – given to them from their spiritual father John Calvin because that was a part of his practice. :-]
.
Calvinist:
Didn’t he check out what the viewpoint consisted of by confirming it with the Scriptures prior to teaching it?
.
br.d
This is easy to understand when one realizes Calvinism is predominantly a system of teaching-teaching-teaching-teaching-teaching-teaching
.
Calvinists are taught to differentiate between scripture and an interpretation of scripture – when that interpretation comes from a NON-Calvinist. But hardly ever when that interpretation is from within Calvinism
.
James White – for example – emphasizes this in a recent dialog with Dr. William Lane Craig
.
Calvinists of course – will not claim to have reached perfection.
But they AUTO-MAGICALLY treat their interpretations as canon – even when their interpretations contradict their own doctrine– which is supposed to be what scripture teaches.
.
Calvinist
If he did, but couldn’t find the Scripture verses to support the position, he should never have affirmed it.
.
br.d
This statement lacks maturity
I hardly think any Calvinist is going to claim to have reached a point of perfection such that he cannot be persuaded into adopting something with which he might later under further scrutiny discover problems.
.
Calvinism is not just a theological belief system.
It is also a social structure in which it is human nature to become psychologically invested.
.
Overcoming psychological investments is a critical part of the process of leaving any group one has been significantly invested in. It is a critical part of “letting go and letting God”.
.
Calvinist
One of the reasons he fails so abysmally in debates is because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and can’t defend his criticisms against Calvinism..
.
br.d
This is a very common argument among Calvinists
Once one understands the psychological burden EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) imposes upon a believer -then one understands – Calvinism (which has Determinism as its foundational core) is a doctrine which doe not want to be rightly understood.
.
Calvinists are constantly trying to evade the Deterministic aspects of the doctrine.
James White for example – in a recent debate – tries to argue Calvinism should not be construed as theological Determinism – which it has been perennially acknowledged within all academia – and by many reformed academics.
.
Determinism – is a belief system no human can coherently live – and while at the same time retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
As Dr. Craig point out
-quote
Nobody can live *AS-IF* all that he thinks and does is determined by causes outside himself. Every determinist recognizes he has to act *AS-IF* he has option(S) to weight and can decide between them – on what course of action to take.
.
Dr. Tomas Kapitan
– quote
To locate an inconsistency within the beliefs of a DELIBERATING DETERMINIST now easy. For as a deliberator, he takes his future act to be yet undetermined. But as a determinist, he assumes the very opposite – that his future is already determined and fixed in the past, such that everything he does was previously determined by factors beyond his control. Thus the ascription of RATIONAL-INCONSISTENCY within the mental state of the deliberating Determinist is secured.”
.
Sean Carroll (Theoretical physicist – Atheist Determinist)
-quote
Every person in the world, no matter how anti-free-will they are, talks about people *AS-IF* they make decisions.
.
So Determinism is one of the key components within the doctrine which makes it the case that the Calvinist will assert his doctrine as TRUE – while living *AS-IF* it is FALSE.
.
This is also consistently manifested within Calvinist language – which long ago evolved into a language of DOUBLE-SPEAK.
.
Dr. Flowers is constantly showing videos of statements made by prominent Calvinists which entail contradiction of the very doctrine they claim to believe.
.
For example – the doctrine stipulates
No event can exist within creation unless that event is knowingly and willingly decreed – by a decree which does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
.
Therefore nothing is granted existence within creation OTHER than that which is decreed – and the creature is never granted the ability to BE/DO OTHER than that which is decreed.
.
Thus – where it is decreed – Calvinist_A will perform SIN_X at TIME_T that decree being infallible – does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE.
.
Thus Calvinist_A is not granted a CHOICE in the matter – simply because no ALTERNATIVE exists for him to choose. And even if an ALTERNATIVE did exist (which is impossible) he wold still not have a Choice because no ALTERNATIVE impulse would be granted existence within his brain.
.
No Calvinist can live coherently with that – and at the same time retain any sense of human normalcy.
.
Therefore all Calvinists go about their office *AS_IF*
1) ALTERNATIVES exist within creation
2) They were granted CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE was *UP TO* them
.
All of which is a complete denial of the doctrine – because the very existence of any of those things would falsify the doctrine of decrees.
.
That is why every Calvinist lives *AS-IF* the doctrine is FALSE
Additionally – Calvinism via Augustine contains DUALISM in which many things appear in the form of “Good-Evil” antithetical pairs.
.
The component of “Good-Evil” within the doctrine is a critical part of the doctrine which Calvinists very much try to obfuscate – and paint over the face of Evil with COSMETIC representations of divine benevolence.
For example – Calvin’s god creates new-born babies specifically to be cast alive into the fire of Moloch – and them perhaps later cast into eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
Calvinists are understandably reluctant to have this aspect of the doctrine rightly understood.
So it is understandable that they will claim observers of the doctrine do not rightly understand it – simply because they don’t want it to be rightly understood.
.
blessings!
Hi Jeff,
I had a conversation today with a person who shared a story about being taught by a Calvinist teacher
What he shared fits very well with the conversation we just had the other day – about Calvinist teaching practices.
.
Here is a summary of what he said:
.
When I was being taught by a Calvinist teacher within our church – there were sooooooo many “conundrums”
Each time we would bump up against a contradiction or a conundrum – he insisted that I simply accept whatever he said and label it a “Divine Mystery”
It started to be clear to me – that many things within the world of Calvinism are RADICALLY different.
I simply couldn’t bend my mind enough to accept all of the complexities he was teaching.
My inclination to examine and question rather than simply accept what I was being told ultimately led to him praying for my salvation.
Yep! – because I couldn’t agree to simply accept everything he said – I must have been unregenerate or a reprobate.
.
blessings!
In 2018 a person typed on a
Christian Bible Discussion Group
“Here is another rotten translation of the GreeK word “exo” which means “outside” or “without” The way the Trinitarian translators translated this word in Luke 13:28 implies that the religious leaders of Jesus day will be thrown out of the kingdom forever either roasting in the Lake of Fire or “passed through the fire” and annihilated. The word they use “out” is not listed as a translated word…
Luke 13:28 There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast out.
BUT Jesus is consistant in what he learned from his Father’s Torah concerning the coming judgment of these people…refinement outside the camp, city or kingdom(Lev.13, Numbers 5:1-4, Mal.4:4). When properly translated “outside” you shoud see it is more consistant with Matthew 21:31 in which Jesus witnessed these people will be the least in the kingdom for being lawless(Matt. 5:19)
Luke 13:28 Luke 13:28 There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves CAST OUTSIDE(EXO-OUTSIDE, WITHOUT)
Matthew 21:31 “…Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God BEFORE(AHEAD OF) YOU.”
These who were first in this present evil age will be last in the coming kingdom when they rise in the second resurrection and will with shame take the lowest seat at the wedding feast after refinement OUTSIDE the kingdom in the Lake of Fire. They will gnash their teeth knowing they threw it all away and will now have to be subject to those they once despised
Strong’s Concordance
exó: outside, without
Original Word: ἔξω
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: exó
Phonetic Spelling: (ex’-o)
Definition: outside, without
Usage: without, outside.
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from ek
Definition
outside, without
NASB Translation
away (2), foreign (1), forth (1), outer (1), outside (20), outsiders* (3).”
Any opinions ?
br.d
Hi Jeff
.
Brian is the best person here to speak concerning the Greek – because he teaches it.
.
But here is something for you to try
.
Copy this Greek word: ἐκβαλλομένους
This is the Greek word in Luke 13:28
.
Go to the Google language translator web-page
Paste the Greek word into the translator and let Google tell you what it is translated to in English
.
I believe you will find Google translates it to: “thrown out”
.
The Greek word βαλλο is quite frequently translated as “Cast” or “Throw”
.
For example – in John 6:37 “I will never cast out”
In the Greek this is: ἐκβάλω
.
Word order in the Koine Greek language – is not the same as it is in English.
And a given Greek word may have different letter endings – depending upon how the word is used within the sentence.
.
I dabbled in the Greek many years ago – and enjoyed starting to read the N.T. in the original language
But I’ve forgotten more than I remembered! :-]
.
I’m sure Brian will have some excellent insight for you.
.
Blessings!
Well Jeff, I am sure you know the issue. It seems there would be agreement between us that they are cast out of the kingdom and into hell fire. But you have not proven from Scripture, it seems to me, they will be let back in after spending a period of time in that hell fire, or that the hell fire is used for refinement and not everlasting judgment. The issue is not the Greek word. They are outside of the kingdom in hell forever.
Three passages seem to clearly push against those ideas which you seem to be proposing. 1. In the story of the rich man in Hades, he is told he is not able to pass over for that place of torment. And we know Hades will eventually be cast into the Lake of Fire later (Luke 16:26, Rev 20:14). 2. Jesus calls hell “everlasting punishment”, which means it doesn’t end (Matt 25:46). And 3. John hears that the torment of those in hell will be day and night, and they will have no rest, the smoke of that torment going up forever (Rev 14:11).
If I’m not mistaken, this passage is the Catholics justification of Purgatory.
Some people claim that
The Christian Church invented
Hell , that the actual word
“Hell” was never originally in the Bible , so much confusion and endless different Interpretations ,What does the Bible properly interpreted really Teach ?
Anyone see this website
christianitywithoutinsanity.com
Hello Jeff
I hope this finds you well!.
.
On this topic – you may be interested in checking out a website called “openbible.info”
Go to openbible.info
In the address bar – where “openbible.info” is displayed – add the following
.
/topics/hell
.
After you add that text into the address bar – press ENTER
If yo typed it correctly – the system should list a number of verses on the topic of hell.
.
BTW:
If you are concerned about hell as a possible future for yourself – you will not want to adopt Calvinism because:
.
1) Calvin’s god creates the vast majority of souls within the total human population – specifically for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
2) Calvin’s god also creates a certain percentage of believers as CHAFF believers – whom he deceives – giving them a FALSE faith and FALSE SENSE of salvation.
.
These Calvinists will go through their whole lives – experiencing a constant stream of infallibly decreed FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation.
.
They will at some point wake up in the lake of fire – and then realize what Calvin’s god created them for.
.
John Calvin explains:
-quote
But the Lord….instills into their minds such *A SENSE* ..as can be felt without the Spirit of adoption. (Institutes 3.2.11)
-quote
He illumines *ONLY FOR A TIME* to partake of it; then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
.
So if you are concerned or weary about the topic of hell – adopting Calvinism will probably compound those concerns and worries because:
1) The Calvinist is not granted any CERTAINTY of his PERCEPTIONS of salvation
2) The Calvinist is not granted any CERTAINTY if any promises to the Elect within scripture apply to himself
3) The Calvinist is not granted any CERTAINTY of salvation
4) Calvin’s god creates the preponderance of souls within the total human population – specifically for hell for his good pleasure.
.
Most Calvinists lie to themselves – trying to label the doctrine – a doctrine of “Grace”
When the doctrine is actually – a doctrine of “Good-Evil”
.
This is one of the reasons why Dr. Flowers has such a huge heart for the Calvinists
And why he so strongly desires for Christians to not get ensnared by Calvinism’s doctrine of “Good-Evil”
It is a doctrine which Calvinists are required to lie to themselves – in order to embrace
.
Blessings!
A person this
November 2024 made the following comment about Why they left
Calvinism and
Romans Chapters 9-11
“Election is not about being chosen for “salvation”. Rather it’s about being chosen for *service*.”
How would a Calvinist respond and how would we then counter respond ?
Plus in 2023 a person typed online
“Calvinism is not a dirty word or a heresy. It is a true biblical way of thinking, and seeing salvation is in God‘s hands, not our own. God does not force us to believe. God regenerates our heart, which allows us to have faith and believe. Without this grace and mercy, we would all go straight to hell. ”
A person replied
“💯 A degraded view of a Holy God and an exalted view of sinful man has led to great confusion regarding the doctrines of grace.”
What about some Calvinist Christians are Happy being
Calvinist in their Theology and they see Beauty in Calvinism, how can we ever truly know how to properly interpret and comprehend the Bible
br.d
Hello Jeff and I hope this finds you well!
.
That person’s statement is not completely wrong.
.
If you were to do a word analysis throughout scripture on the word “Election” you would find it does indeed show up as being used to refer to a “service”
.
But what does it refer to in the other instances?
There is an excellent resource for finding this out – if you look on Youtube – look for Kevin Thompsons channel – which is called “Beyond the Fundamentals”
.
Kevin has an excel spreadsheet that you can obtain from him with every reference within scripture to “Elect” or “Election”.
.
He also reviews this on various presentations on Youtube.
So you can search in his channel – perhaps do a text search in Youtube on the word “Election, Beyond the fundamentals” and see what videos come up.
.
What you need to understand about the Calvinist concept of “Election” is that it coincides with an ancient GNOSTIC concept of “Election” which existed in Augustine’s day.
.
Augustine spent a decade of his life as a disciple of a GNOSTIC CHRISTIAN movement.
Calvinists will argue that Augustine eventually rejected those GNOSTIC doctrines
However – some scholars today – are convinced Augustine derived his theology from various components of that Gnosticism and also from doctrine taught by a Greek teacher whose name was Plotinus.
.
Augustine corresponded by letter to a close friend Nebridius, who praises how Augustine’s letters: “speak of Christ, Plato and Plotinus”.
.
If you google “Augustine, and Plotinus” you will see wikipedia articles showing that Augustine remained an avid student of Plotinus right up to the end of his life.
.
.
The GNOSTIC concept of “Election” is that certain souls are “Elected” at the time they are created.
.
The GNOSTIC concept of “Election” is that people are “Elect” before they become believers.
.
If you review all of the instance within the N.T. where a N.T. writer identifies people as “Elect” you will find that limited to *ONLY* those who are believers.
.
The N.T. authors never identify people who are NOT believers – or NOT YET believers as “Elect”
.
The Calvinist is going to try utilize certain PROOF-TEXT verses to insist people are “Elect” before they are believers.
.
But the Calvinist has to read that concept into the text.
The Calvinist assumes a concept of “Election” that is consistent with the ancient GNOSTIC concept.
.
I would suggest you check out Kevin Thompson’s presentations on that topic.
He is a stickler about accepting *ONLY* what the text says – and not reading things into it that are not there.
.
Blessings!
And Happy Thanksgiving!
.
br.d :-]
Jeff
A degraded view of a Holy God and an exalted view of sinful man has led to great confusion regarding the doctrines of grace.”
.
br.d
I forgot to respond to this.
.
Yes!
That is correct.
.
You need to think about how the Calvinist uses the term “Grace” when he calls his doctrine a “doctrine of grace”
.
Calvin’s god creates new-born babies specifically to be cast alive into the fire of Moloch – for his good pleasure – and to glorifying himself.
.
And then some of those babies are later cast into the lake of fire – for eternal torment – again for his good pleasure -and to glorify himself.
.
John Calvin
-quote
by the eternal *GOOD PLEASURE* of god though the reason does not appear, they are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
.
So part of the Calvinist’s definition of “Grace” is the act of creating new-born babies into a fire – and then throwing them into eternal torment in a lake of fire.
.
Most people would call that a distorted use of the term “Grace”.
.
However – Calvinists call their doctrine a doctrine of “Grace” in order to obfuscate the EVIL components which are inherent within the doctrine.
.
It is insightful to see Calvinists are marketing advertisement agents.
They are always trying to advertise their product – to get people to buy it.
In order to sell a product – the advertisement must make that product *APPEAR* desirable to people
.
You will find Calvinists working very hard to make Calvinism *APPEAR* to be a doctrine of divine benevolence – when it is predominantly a doctrine of divine malevolence.
.
The Calvinist must make the doctrine *APPEAR* desirable to you – in order to get you to buy it.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Hello Everyone
carm.org has an article headlined
“Do we choose God or does God choose us?”
by Matt Slick May 26, 2015
Also from carm.org an article is headlined
“Does God choose us based on foreseen faith?”
by Matt Slick May 26, 2015
How should we respond ?
What would we say is the
True Gospel , as opposed to a watered down or false Gospel ?
How can we ever know how to properly interpret, comprehend, and read the Bible correctly, I apologize if I am
being a bit redundant
Hi Jeff,
The problem with many Calvinist claims concerning human CHOICE making – is that those claims are simply not humanly possible.
.
Lets say that I claim – I made a CHOICE to not write you a check for 10 Trillion dollars
.
The only way – that claim could possibly be true – is if I had the *OPTION* to write a check for that kind of money
.
But what if that *OPTION* does not exist for me?
Then I am making a claim of having a CHOICE for something which actually did not exist for me to choose.
.
I think you can understand the how that works.
.
Lets say I claim I made a CHOICE to not ride on air-force-1 with the president yesterday.
.
Once again – the only way that claim can possibly be true – is if the *OPTION* to do that existed for me
.
But if that *OPTION* did not exist – then my claim to have that CHOICE is a FALSE claim
.
.
So we see by this – that people can claim to have a CHOICE in the matter of something which in fact does not exist for them to choose.
.
.
Similarly – Calvinists will make claims to have CHOICE in the matter of things which do not exist for them to choose.
.
**** Remember what the doctrine stipulates *****
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
So the doctrine stipulates *NOTHING* within creation is granted the ability to BE/DO OTHERWISE than that which was infallibly decreed.
.
The very existence of anything within creation that is *OTHER* that what was decreed – would falsify the doctrine of decrees.
.
Now lets say – it was decreed that Calvinist_A will perform SIN_X at TIME_T
.
That decree being infallible – does not grant anything within creation to *BE OTHER* than that which was decreed
.
Therefore the *OPTION* for Calvinist_A to NOT perform SIN_X at TIME_T does not exist.
.
And it is humanly impossible to CHOOSE something which does not exist for you to choose.
.
So Calvinist_A did not have the *OPTION* to NOT perform SIN_X at TIME_T
That *OPTION* simply did not exist
.
.
There is no such thing as an ALTERNATIVE from that which is infallibly decreed.
Therefore ALTERNATIVES do not exist for Calvinists to choose.
.
This is an aspect of the doctrine which many Calvinists refuse to accept.
.
So you have to be very weary whenever Calvinists make claims about having CHOICES which their doctrine does not grant to them.
.
Blessings!
A book published in 2020
by
Alejandro Gonzaga is titled
“No Other: The Truth of Calvinism”
Has anyone read it ?
Plus in 2021 a book by
Ron Craig is titled
“Demonic Conspiracy Known As Calvinism: The truth about Calvinism no one else has had the insight or courage to reveal!”
Hi Jeff,
I have not read that book.
But it sounds a little bit over the top.
.
I personally recognize things about Calvinism which IF CALVINISTS WERE EVER TO DIVULGE – very few Christians would ever choose to get entangled into it.
.
The phenomenon which is widely known as STEALTH Calvinism should serve as a red-flag that something is wrong.
.
When a professing Christian lowers himself to the use of misleading language or STEALTH strategies which always entail some lack of honesty – then that should serve as a red-flag.
.
We find Calvinist ministers lying to NON-Calvinist congregations who are looking for a pastor – and who clearly let all applicants know – they do not want a Calvinist as a minister.
.
We find authors of Calvinist materials being published in the Christian marketplace – who know if they advertise their materials as Calvinist or Reformed – the average Christian will simply look elsewhere for similar material.
.
Consequently- authors of Calvinist materials infiltrate the Christian marketplace – and buyers are never made aware those materials are designed to influence them by STEALTH means.
.
We find the language of Calvinists quite often designed to mislead people by the use of language which infers degrees of AUTONOMY granted to the creature – which does not exist in Calvinism.
.
So all in all – there are numerous issues Calvinists have with lack of honesty.
And that should serve as a red-flag to any follower of Jesus Christ.
.
.
So although I see problems and weaknesses and various forms of dishonesty in Calvinism – I would not go so far as to see them as demonic or evil or a conspiracy etc.
.
There are people who get captured by all sorts of cults – which includes Bible based cults.
And the interesting aspect of that is that those people do not lack intelligence.
And yet they will remain captured by that religious cult for pretty much all of their lives.
.
So we can see – that people can be vulnerable to getting drawn into belief systems.
Especially when those belief systems operate in any kind of STEALTH mode.
.
So I feel sorry for Calvinists and I pray the Lord will deliver their minds and set them free.
But to see them as evil etc – is simply irrational.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Jeff,
If you are interested in a book about Calvinism – your wisest choice would be a book written by a person who had been a serious Calvinist – and then choose to come out of it.
.
A person of that perspective – will speak from experience and from a thorough understanding of the doctrine
.
You might look at Ronnie Roger’s book:
Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist: The Disquieting Realities of Calvinism
.
Author Ronnie W. Rogers leads readers through the intricacies of Calvinist thought…..
Ronnie takes the reader through his journey in and out of Calvinism – and presents a clear picture of the ramifications of subscribing to the doctrine.
.
You will discover as Ronnie did, that Calvinists do not divulge aspects of the doctrine they calculate people will reject or struggle with. This way people can become drawn into the doctrine – and then at some point be left on their own to discover the disquieting realities which Calvinist ministries do not want to tell people.
.
.
Also another Ex-Calvinist Daniel Gracely his book is “Calvinism: A Closer Look”
.
Throughout the book Daniel explains the number of ways Calvinists use language in a misleading manner.
He explains Calvinist’s use words designed to create FALSE PICTURES by word association.
Words are used – such that when they are framed within a sentence they create false meanings.
The result is that that hearers or readers assume meanings which are false
This is because when words are said to mean A and NOT-A at the same time and in the same sense, there cannot be true meaning.
.
.
So if you are looking for a book to read on the subject – you might consider one of those.
.
Blessings!
br.d
A Pastor once said that
Calvinism appeals to very intelligent , intellectual people,
Calvinism seems to place great emphasis on the Sovereignty of God
but don’t Non-Calvinist Christians also believe in the Sovereignty of God , but just define it differently , the extent and ways to which God is Sovereignty and what amount or types of Free Will
Humans have ?
Other than very basic essential Christian doctrines in the Bible, such as the
Trinity, Deity of Christ , it seems as if Christians and Bible Scholars can nitpick and debate various Bible verses, and be almost OCD all over debating endlessly back and forth, non-stop without End and still Not be certain
As there are verses for and against many different Bible beliefs, doctrines and Theologies , it’s so Difficult and Frustrating to Comprehend and understand .
Good morning Jeff,
To me there has never been a reason to respond because BR.D is so knowledgeable and he is great at articulating the cleat pit falls within calvinism. You bring up an interesting point to me in regard to sovereignty and the endless debating to never be sure in regard to God’s Word.
However I disagree what I have seen in denominational religion (not that I’m an expert) is a level of man”s beliefs. Therfore a level of control imo. Calvinist in particular want to use sovereignty as an elevated extra meaning which ultimately limits what God can do with no explanation needed, but also places Him as a divine controller. There is a level of control in all religion/denominations..
“To regulate lay conduct a system of domiciliary visits was established … and
questioned the occupants on all phases of their lives. … The allowable color and
quantity of clothing, and the number of dishes permissible at a meal, were
specified by law. Jewelry and lace were frowned upon. A woman was jailed for
arranging her hair to an immoral height. … Censorship of the press was taken
over from Catholic and secular precedents and enlarged: books … of immoral
tendency were banned. … To speak disrespectfully of Calvin or the clergy was a
crime. A first violation of these ordinances was punished with a reprimand,
further violation with fines, persistent violation with imprisonment or
banishment. Fornication was to be punished with exile or drowning; adultery,
blasphemy, or idolatry, with death … a child was beheaded for striking its
parents. In the years 1558-59 there were 414 prosecutions for moral offenses;
between 1542 and 1564 there were seventy-six banishments and fifty-eight
executions; the total population of Geneva was then about 20,000.”
Will Durant, “”Caesar and Christ,”” Pt. Ill of The Story of Civilization (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1950), 474.
Philip Schaff
History of the Christian Church, vol. 8 , p. 700.
“The Reformers inherited the doctrine of persecution from their mother
Church, and practiced it as far as they had the power. They fought
intolerance with intolerance. They differed favorably from their
opponents in the degree and extent, but not in the principle, of
intolerance. They broke down the tyranny of popery, and thus opened the
way for the development of religious freedom; but they denied to others
the liberty which they exercised themselves. The Protestant governments
in Germany and Switzerland excluded, within the limits of their
jurisdiction, the Roman Catholics from all religious and civil rights, and
took exclusive possession of their churches, convents, and other property.
They banished, imprisoned, drowned, beheaded, hanged, and burned
Anabaptists, Antitrinitarians, Schwenkfeldians, and other dissenters”
In the end the choice to believe ie faith/ trust is a genuine choice we either trust Him above the debating or trust the debater. His Word does not bring stiff, but rather a changed heart and mind!
In Him alone🌻
Reggie
Hi Jeff
There are two specific points to first address in this post
.
Firstly – it is critical to recognize there is a *MARKETING* characteristic to Calvinism
If you look at other Christian theologies – you will find them happy to explain their views.
But they are not upset or insulted when you don’t find their theology of interest
And they are not upset or insulted if you find some aspect of their theology undesirable.
.
Calvinists are a completely different animal!!!!
.
For the Calvinist *IMAGE* is the most critical aspect of their belief system.
If under examination – anyone recognizes any aspect of Calvinism unpalatable – Calvinists can become very upset.
.
Calvinists have a very intensive presence on the internet *MARKETING* their belief system.
They have a presence on AM radio *MARKETING* their belief system
And if they could – they would have an intensive presence on TV *MARKETING* their belief system.
.
Consequently – Calvinists tend to operate as *MARKETING AGENTS*
.
Now as an adult – you understand the underlying urgency within any product advertisement.
.
The advertisement is always designed to make the product *APPEAR* desirable.
.
Frosted Mini Wheats might be advertised as a “Nutrition Food”
But the savvy buyer knows it isn’t
.
Fruit drinks might be advertised as “Sugar Free”
But the savvy buyer knows they are full of corn syrup.
.
Medication products might be advertises as curing certain ailments
But they don’t want to tell you the side affects.
.
So you have to be very careful with all claims made by Calvinists – because Calvinists have a very intense urgency to *MARKET* their belief system.
.
When ever anyone has that intense an urgency to *MARKET* something – honesty will always be compromised.
.
So it makes perfect sense that a Calvinist pastor will *ADVERTISE* Calvinism as being intellectual – because that *ADVERTISEMENT* is designs to make the product *APPEAR* desirable.
.
However – the Claim that Calvinism is more intellectual backfires on the Calvinist – when you start to present what the what doctrine stipulates to them.
.
There are things which the doctrine stipulates – which Calvinists do not find palatable – and do not want to acknowledge.
.
And that is not an ‘Intellectual” response.
It is rather an *EMOTIONAL* response.
.
So whenever a Calvinist tells me Calvinism is more intellectual – I simply start to list what their doctrine stipulates – and what them blow up like an emotional chicken! 😀
.
.
The second point you made – which was the last point – is the issue of things difficult to understand.
.
This is another claim that is consistently made by Calvinists – because of the numerous logical contradictions within the belief system.
.
When anyone scrutinizes the doctrine under the scrutiny of LOGIC – one will always find self-contradictions.
.
The Calvinist response to self-contradictions – is to appeal to divine mysteries – and divine difficulties etc
.
Lets say you bump into a Catholic – and you ask him about praying to Mary.
He tells you the Bible teaches the believer to pray to Mary
Under scrutiny – you discover his interpretations of scripture are self-contradicting
.
His strategy for evading those self-contradictions – is to appeal to divine mystery – or divine difficulty.
.
I think you can see how that works.
.
Now remember – the god of Calvinism – designs the vast majority of the human population for eternal torment – for his good pleasure.
.
John Calvin
-quote
by the eternal *GOOD PLEASURE* of god though the reason does not appear, they are *NOT FOUND* but *MADE* worthy of destruction. – (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of god pg 121)
.
The god of Calvinism does not want people to *UNDERSTAND* the Gospel – because he created them for damnation.
.
So it makes perfect sense that a Calvinist would appeal to divine mysteries.
.
I think you can understand why that would be the case.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Jeff:
Don’t Non-Calvinist Christians also believe in the Sovereignty of God , but just define it differently , the extent and ways to which God is Sovereignty and what amount or types of Free Will
Humans have ?
.
br.d
As I have mentioned to you many times – the underlying foundation of Calvinism – and that which separates it from all of its alternatives is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) – as enunciated within Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
So EDD is the underlying foundation for the Calvinist definition of divine sovereignty.
The essence of Divine sovereignty for the Calvinist – is the infallible decree which determines *EVERYTHING* that comes to pass – and *EVERYTHING* that is granted existence within creation.
.
Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees is completely unique to Calvinism and not found in any other Christian theology.
.
REMEMBER:
1) *NOTHING* is granted existence within creation that is NOT decreed
2) *NOTHING* is granted existence within creation that is an ALTERNATIVE of that which was decreed
3) *NOTHING* is granted existence within creation that is CONTRARY to that which was decreed.
4) *NOTHING* within creation is granted the ability to BE OTHER or DO OTHER than that which was decreed.
.
That is going to have a profound effect on “Freedom” granted to creation – or to creatures within creation.
.
For any [X] which Calvin’s god decrees come to pass – he *MUST* grant “Freedom” for that [X] to come to pass.
If he does not grant “Freedom” for that which he decrees – then he is a house divided against himself.
.
ADAM IN THE GARDEN FOR EXAMPLE:
1) It was decreed that Adam would infallibly [EAT] the fruit
2) Therefore Adam *MUST* be granted “Freedom” to do that which was decreed
3) Thus Adam *MUST* be granted “Freedom” to [EAT] the fruit
.
4) But Adam cannot be granted “Freedom” to [NOT EAT] the fruit – because that would be CONTRARY to the decree
And that which is CONTRARY to the decree is not granted within creation.
.
.
The same would be true – of anything Calvin’s god decrees concerning a Calvinist.
.
Lets say it is decreed – Calvinist_A will infallibly perform SIN_X at TIME_T
1) Calvinist_A *MUST* be granted “Freedom” to perform SIN_X at TIME_T
.
2) But Calvinist_A is NOT granted “Freedom” to NOT perform SIN_X at TIME_T because that would be CONTRARY to the decree – and that which is CONTRARY to the decree is not granted within creation.
.
.
NOW CONCERNING HUMAN CHOICE
Outside of Calvinism – we have the following
1) ALTERNATIVES exist within creation
2) Humans are granted CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE is *UP TO* the human to make.
.
Notice though – (1-3) above do not exist for the Calvinist
Because the infallible decree does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE from that which was decreed
Thus ALTERNATIVES do not exist
Since ALTERNATIVES do not exist – it follows – they do not exist for the Calvinist to choose.
.
Therefore Calvinists do not have CHOICE in the *NORMAL* sense which all other people in the world understand.
.
Calvinist do not have CHOICE between CONTRARY OPTIONS – because CONTRARY OPTIONS do not exist in Calvinism – because *NOTHING* within creation can be CONTRARY to that which is decreed.
.
.
So Calvinists have what is called NON-FREE “Freewill”
.
Blessings!
Happy New Year Everyone
Hope we all have a Great 2025
I emailed the Calvinist Christian website carm.org about if in the
Bible “Election” refers to Service and Not Salvation
A person replied
“When someone makes a claim that certain words mean a certain thing, we should always ask them to show us from the text where it says that.
Non-Calvinists can define words a certain way, as they want, but they cannot prevent other denominations from defining those same words a different way.
Most of these people have never done a systematic word study of the word “elect,” and so they may be missing a lot of contexts. Calvinism looks at
the totality of the usage of the word and from that derives a denominational viewpoint.
Here’s an article from our website that you may find helpful”
With a link to the entry
“Unconditional Election”
by Matt Slick | Sep 22, 2016 | Doctrine and Theology, Christian Theology
LINK REMOVED per SOT101 policy
This is so confusing
I guess some things God only Knows with 100% certainty
Hello Jeff and happy New Years!
.
Firstly – please remember – SOT101 policy does not permit links to other web-sites – unless they are provided by SOT101 content authors.
.
So I removed the link you provided.
.
Secondly- the response you received would be applicable to anyone who is trying to define words in scripture so as to make those words affirm a given theological position.
.
And that would apply to Calvinism as well.
.
It is well recognized by Reformed authors – that Calvinism is traced back to Augustine.
.
Augustine lived within the hierarchical system of the Catholic church – at a period of time which could be called its Embryonic phase.
.
A period of time in which Catholic leaders were very superstitious – embracing objects which they called “relics” which they considered to have supernatural powers. The veneration of relics – such as parts of a dead body – or a meteor. These were believed to have spiritual power.
.
Within Catholic buildings you could find statues of various pagan deities – the god Pan – or the god Zeus.
.
Catholic historian – Theodore Maynard
writes:
“It has often be charged… that Catholicism has been overlaid with many pagan incrustations.
Catholicism is ready to accept that charge – and to make it her boast.
The great god Pan is not really dead, he is baptized.”
.
So Augustine thrives within a religious system which is highly SYNCRETISTIC
.
Augustine spent a decade of his life as a disciple of a Gnostic Christian group.
.
Christian Gnosticism asserted a significant presence in its day and the Gnostic sect of Manichaeism flourished in the ancient world. Manichaeism spread with extraordinary speed through both the east and west, from North Africa to China. Being widely promoted by apostles, it reached Egypt at around 240 A.D., and Rome at around 280 A.D.
.
The Roman Emporer Galerius issued the Edict of Toleration in 311 A.D., which ended the Diocletianic persecution of Christianity. Manichaean monasteries existed in Rome in 312 A.D. during the time of the Catholic Pope, Miltiades.
.
Augustine is the primary conduit for mixing Christian theology with NeoPlatonism (doctrines of Plato)
.
See the article located at Christian.net titled “How Augustine was influenced by NeoPlatonism”
.
Dr. Kenneth Wilson – in his research on Augustine – shows how many aspects of Augustine’s theology – are borrowed either out of Gnostic concepts or Platonic concepts.
.
Here is quote from Dr. Kam-lun Edwin LEE (Augustine, manichaeism and the good – Oxford University Press)
Augustine’s development of the idea of predestination reveals the Manichaean concept of the Good at work in three ways: on the framework of that development, in the implication of determinism, and on the context of the doctrine.
.
Once we understand the influence that Gnostic concepts has on Augustine – it becomes easy to understand how a Calvinist can have a concept of “Election” that would be the same concept a Gnostic Christian would have.
.
The Gnostic concept of “Election” is that people are “Elect” at the foundation of the world – before humans are created.
.
So for the Gnostic Christian – people who are NOT SAVED or NOT-YET SAVED are “Elect”
.
But you will never find any N.T. author identifying people who are NOT SAVED or NOT-YET SAVED as “Elect”
.
The N.T. authors – only identify people who are ALREADY saved as “Elect”.
.
.
Also – when you presented that question to your Calvinist friend – you failed to mention – I told you about the work of Kevin Thompson (Beyond the Fundamentals) and how he created a spread-sheet of every reference within scripture to the word “Election”.
.
.
When you present questions to your Calvinist friends it would serve you better if you were to give them the full information.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Jeff – – please also take a look at a Youtube video presented by ThePristineFaith
.
The title of the video is “NT Wright Exposes Calvinist Ignorance of the Old Testament”
.
Grab the title as I’ve provided it your mouse
And paste the title into the Youtube search field
It should bring up the video for you.
.
So you will find – there are numerous scholars agree that the Calvinist conceptions of “Election” and “Predestination” are tainted by pagan concepts which Augustine highly valued – and never grew out of.
.
blessings!
br.d
brdmod,
Just curious:
Does Provisionism ditch all things Augustine? What changed between Calvinism and Provisionism in Election/Predestination?
The only real argument I see between Calvinism and Provisionism is Free Will vs. No Free Will, but that election and predestination remains the same. The only difference there would be is the TYPE of adjective used between the two graces offered (prevenient vs. irresistable) as a PRE-AMBLE, not to salvation, but just to believe. This belief system of both REQUIRES a belief in Augustine’s “Original Sin” doctrine. There is no way around it.
I conclude that Provisionism doesn’t solve the problem to Calvinism. Reformers never gave up everything Catholic. There is still too much Catholic baggage in most of Christendom.
The following is Ronnie Rogers words:
“I believe in total depravity (TD) and mean by that term that sin affected every aspect of humanity, and that with creative grace alone, man cannot make a spiritually restorative decision apart from redemptive grace. It seems that regarding depravity (effects of the fall), we are only left with two general options. The fall either affected humanity totally or partially. I do not believe in partial depravity, and, therefore, I believe in TD. A fortiori, I refuse to permit Calvinism’s distortive use of TD, with its unbiblical essentials such as unconditional election and efficacious grace upon only a few to control the dialogue.”
I do not conform to Ronnie’s beliefs at all.
Ed Chapman
br.d
Hi Ed,
Your questions would be better put to Brian the next time he is here.
.
But certainly the concepts of election and predestination would be radically different between the two positions.
.
My response to Ronnie Rogers on his statement about TD is that he should not be using that language at all.
.
The phrase “Total Depravity” is a Calvinist concoction and also functions for the Calvinist as a LIE OF OMISSION designed to mislead people.
.
The scriptures do not use the words “Total Depravity”
The scriptures use the words “Bondage of Corruption” and those two phrases do not mean the same thing.
.
IMHO Calvinists approximately 200 years after John Calvin’s death – came up with the TULIP which is designed to make Calvinism *APPEAR* similar to Arminianism – for the sake of drawing Arminians into Calvinism.
.
For example – Calvinists today – use the “T” in the TULIP to falsely attribute mans abilities/inabilities – and from that his eternal destiny – to the state of his nature.
.
When the TRUTH is – per the underlying doctrine – the state of man’s nature – at every nano-second in time – is 100% meticulously predestined – and at any instance in time – cannot possibly be OTHER than what it was decreed to infallibly be.
.
So the Calvinist today uses TD to create a FALSE representation of the doctrine.
.
.
You have probably heard that in Calvinism – there is no such thing as man being granted any degree of AUTONOMY
.
Well Calvinists have found – the NON-Calvinist audience does not find that aspect of the doctrine palatable
And they will reject Calvinism because man comes off looking too much like a puppet or a robot.
.
Calvinists understand this – and they become experts in deceptive language tricks designed to produce the *APPEARANCE* that man is granted some minimal degree of AUTONOMY.
.
And the “T” in the Calvinist’s TULIP is designed to produce that appearance.
brdmod,
I agree with everything you said. Ronnie has a lot of articles here. And that’s his belief. Brian’s, if you listen to him cloesly, resembles Ronnie’s.
It’s that GRACE, with an adjective, that Provisionists use, that is no different than the grace, with an adjective that Calvinists use.
Both GRACE’S are a MEANS to “believe”. And it is THAT discussion of grace that confirms TD, acknowledges TD. And I have a problem with that.
You can’t have FREE WILL with that still in the balance, but free will is taught in Provisionism. You can’t have free will if there is a PREAMBLE to belief. You can only have free will, in this discussion, AFTER the adjective grace is imputed, but not before. Until then, TD!
Ed Chapman
br.d
Hi Ed
.
Lets take the story of the boy who was throwing himself in the fire
Jesus said to his father “If you can believe – all things are possible to him that believes”
.
The father cried out with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
.
Now if Jesus were to answer that father’s plea to help his unbelief – wouldn’t Jesus doing that be a manifestation of grace?
brdmod,
There seems to be a context to the story. The father had a son who had a demon, and he wanted the demon to be cast out. He took his son to the disciples of Jesus, but THEY could not cast out the demon. The disciples, who believed in Jesus, believed in salvation in Jesus…they failed.
verse 18
18 …I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not.
23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.
The father already believe in Jesus. That’s obvious. Would unbelievers bring their children to disciples of Jesus to cast out demons? I don’t think so.
This isn’t about salvation, as what Soteriology is about. It’s about casting out a demon. This is like believing that you can walk on water, like Peter did…for a moment. It’s not a matter of believing in Jesus as The Christ for salvation. If you have enough faith, you can move mountains. And since Peter walked on water, I’m assuming that mountain moving is literal, not allegorical. So this isn’t about salvation. It’s about levitation. LOL.
So, it’s a “believe” what? Believe that JESUS can do the job of casting out the demon that the disciples couldn’t. The disciple’s couldn’t do it. Why wouldn’t there be DOUBT? Disciple’s have been casting out demons for a while at this point, but just could not at this one.
24 And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
So what did Jesus do to HELP in that father’s unbelief?
Jesus cast out the demon, proving to the father that he could cast out the demon that his disciple’s couldn’t.
By Jesus DOING THE JOB, that helpled the father’s unbelief. It’s like doubting Thomas, he didn’t believe until he saw it for himself…THEN he believed. But then Jesus said, blessed are those who have not seen, and believe.
So, that father had to see to believe. I don’t see this as a matter of “grace” given as a preamble to believe. Why? I don’t believe in that religious philosophy, which both Arminians and Calvinists believe in, including Provisionists. Why? I don’t believe that anyone is BORN DEAD in their sins and trespasses, and I don’t believe in Original Sin, which REQUIRES a grace to WAKE THEM UP to the gospel. I don’t believe in any such thing.
28 And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, Why could not we cast him out?
29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.
There was a Romans soldier who had a child dying…he didn’t need Jesus to go to the child, for he said, just say the word and I know it will be done.
So no, I’m not seeing an imputation of grace as a preamble…just to believe…at all.
I see a VOLUNTARY faith, originating in the man himself, with grace being the END RESULT, not the preable to.
Let me say that again…
Grace is the END RESULT of YOUR FAITH, not the preamble to imputed faith. Free will has to be 100 percent.
Except if you are talking about prophesy, such as the Pharaoah and Jews USED as a prop to tell a spiritual story. Those get mercy.
Ed,
The father already believe in Jesus. That’s obvious. Would unbelievers bring their children to disciples of Jesus to cast out demons? I don’t think so.
.
br.d
So obviously – the father had belief up to a certain point – and Jesus’s statement concerned belief concerning the son’s healing – and that is where the father revealed his lack of belief.
.
So in my mind – if Jesus were to answer the fathers request for help with unbelief – that would be a manifestation of grace on Jesus’ part.
.
Ed
This isn’t about salvation, as what Soteriology is about. It’s about casting out a demon.
.
br.d
In my mind – salvation is simply the healing of a human soul
So for me – there is a principle revealed in this example
So what I see is a principle – which is applicable in both natural as well as spiritual healing (aka salvation)
.
Ed
There was a Romans soldier who had a child dying…he didn’t need Jesus to go to the child, for he said, just say the word and I know it will be done.
.
br.d
Yes! And in that situation – Jesus responded to that man and said “I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel”
.
So this is a case in which there was more than enough faith within the man – and there was request from this father for Jesus to help him with his faith.
.
Ed,
I see a VOLUNTARY faith, originating in the man himself…
.
br.d
I agree – that is consistently what Jesus is looking for with people.
But Jesus doesn’t always find that to be the case with people.
For example – Matthew tells us – Jesus could not do many mighty works in Nazareth – because of their unbelief.
.
.
Having said all of that – I think this focus is on the wrong issue.
.
Total Depravity in Calvinism – is a strategy designed to MASQUERADE Calvinism and make it *APPEAR* to be what a provisionist (aka NON-Calvinist) has.
.
.
Once we understand the Calvinist uses TD to MASQUERADE – then we can recognize – it is really not the issue.
.
What separates Calvinism from Provisionism is the fact that in Calvinism – man is granted NO SAY in the matter of any impulse that will come to pass within his brain.
br.d,
What caused the father to HAVE DOUBTS? Disciples failed to do the job. Based on that result, anyone would have a lack of faith that the demon could be cast out.
What was the NEXT THING that happened when Jesus was asked, help his unbelief? According to what I’m reading from you, Jesus had to impute grace SO THAT he could believe, SO THAT Jesus could cast out the demon, because Jesus can’t do ANYTHING unless the father first believes. If the father didn’t believe, then Jesus wouldn’t be able to cast out a demon?
NO. The next event was Jesus casting out the demon!
I would say that th origin of his unbelief was the disciples’ failure. So Jesus talks to the guy, and the only way that the father is gonna believe, is if he sees it for himself.
See to believe.
Thomas had to see to believe. And Jesus didn’t have a problem with it. He encouraged touching his body to PROVE to Thomas that it was him. Jesus was practically giddy about it. Grace was not imputed as a means to believe. Seeing was. Touching was. Grace is what you get after you believe. Grace is the gift. FAITH IS NEVER A GIFT, because it comes from you. Proving something is a means to INCREASE one’s faith.
So, after the father SAW the results, he FINALLY was able to change his unblief to belief. How much fasting did Jesus do? That’s what he told his disciples…fasting and prayer. What, Jesus skipped lunch?
So, no, I do not believe that Jesus had to IMPUTE grace to the father before Jesus could cast out a demon. That just doesn’t make any sense.
Ed Chapman
Ed,
What caused the father to HAVE DOUBTS? Disciples failed to do the job.
Based on that result, anyone would have a lack of faith that the demon could be cast out.
.
br.d
Certainly we can see the disciples also lacked faith
But the text doesn’t tell us the reason the father lacked faith was caused by the disciples
We might assume that to be the case with the possibility the disciples lack of faith influenced the father
But Jesus doesn’t appear to care about what the reason was
He simply declares the lack of faith – and the father agreed and asked for help.
.
Ed
According to what I’m reading from you, Jesus had to impute grace SO THAT he could believe….
.
br.d
No – I didn’t assume that
To assume that – would be to import Calvinistic concepts of grace into the text.
.
That is why I asked *IF* Jesus were to answer the father’s request would’ that be a manifestation of grace?
.
Ed
Thomas had to see to believe. And Jesus didn’t have a problem with it.
.
br.d
Yes – here we have another example of a lack of faith
What Jesus did in that case – was to give Thomas the evidence which Thomas himself declared he would need to believe
.
.
But what really happens in Calvinism?
In Calvinism – an impulse infallibly and irresistibly comes to pass within the human brain
And the human is granted NO SAY and NO CHOICE in the matter
.
So what is *REALLY* happening in Calvinism is *RADICALLY* different than what NORMAL Christians understand
And Calvinists recognize – their concepts are *RADICALLY* different than what NORMAL Christians understand
.
And they understand if they TELL THE TRUTH – NORMAL Christians will reject their doctrine
So they have to make their doctrine *APPEAR* to be what NORMAL Christians would accept
And that is where they come up with the idea of making grace a gift which the person otherwise does not have
What they have is more like a spell – that irresistibly comes over mind – which is more like witchcraft
.
Ed
FAITH IS NEVER A GIFT, because it comes from you. Proving something is a means to INCREASE one’s faith.
.
br.d
Yes!
But in my mind – the Calvinist calling faith a gift – is part of the *MASK* the Calvinist wears over the face of the doctrine – designed to make the doctrine *APPEAR* normal to NORMAL Christians.
.
.
For the NON-Calvinist – the scriptures make faith a NECESSARY CONDITION for salvation.
That is a huge problem for Calvinism!
.
In Calvinism – a person’s salvation is established *INFALLIBLY* before that person exists.
.
Calvin’s god can regenerate a person without faith.
Thus – in Calvinism – faith is NOT NECESSARY for salvation.
The only thing that is a NECESSARY CONDITION for salvation in Calvinism is an infallible decree.
.
The Calvinist knows this makes his doctrine *RADICALLY* different from what NORMAL Christians understand.
.
The Calvinist knows – if NORMAL Christians recognize how *RADICALLY* different Calvinism is – they will reject it.
.
So “Irresistible Grace” and faith as a gift – are INVENTIONS the Calvinist comes up with to make Calvinism *APPEAR* Biblical.
br.d,
This wasn’t a matter of disciples lack of faith, either, but lack of PROCEDURE for which they were not told.
28 And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, Why could not we cast him out?
29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.
NOTE the word “NOTHING” but…prayer and fasting. Jesus did not tell them “for the lack of faith. Hold on, let me give you some faith! Where is my magic wand….toil a foil of a rabbits foot, do not eat any food!
As Gallagher would say…foot and food should rhyme! LOL.
Ed
br.d,
So, like I said, all this talk about imputing grace in order to believe…which BOTH Calvinists and Provisionists, and Arminians believe, ORIGINATES from the doctrines of Original Sin.
Let’s just set aside TD for a moment. Let’s just discuss this from a matter of imputed grace as a means to believe, instead of as the result of belief.
Without ORIGINAL SIN, Prevenient Grace falls flat. Without ORIGINAL SIN, Irresistable Grace falls flat.
I’m declaring that NO GRACE at all is needed at all TO beleive, but that GRACE is a gift as a RESULT of belief, that no, belief, or FAITH is NOT A GIFT, but comes from YOUR OWN SELF.
So, Provisionism teaches free will. Guess what? I don’t see free will even possible with Provisionism, because it is contingent on an imputation of grace first. And therefore, TD, just like Ronnie teaches. No free will…UNTIL…
Provisionism has some mathematical problems.
Ed Chapman
Ed,
So, like I said, all this talk about imputing grace in order to believe…which BOTH Calvinists and Provisionists
.
br.d
Its not my understand that Dr. Flowers would say that some kind of special faith or grace has to be imputed *INTO* a person in order for that person to believe unto salvation.
.
From my understanding – Dr. Flowers rejects the Calvinist notion of “Total Depravity” where it would be defined as the inability to believe.
.
If you read Dr. Flowers book “Potter’s Promise” you will find Dr. Flowers consistently arguing against the Calvinist notion of “Total Inability”
.
Without the notion of Total Inability – there is no need for any special “imputation” of faith or grace.
People are created with the ability to believe all sorts of things.
But a person affected by drugs or by demonic influences etc may have a special need for some kind of grace.
.
However I would say Dr. Flowers sees the ministry of the Gospel as an act of grace.
br.d,
Well, it might be well worth veryifying that with Dr. Flowers, because he has a lot of Ronnie’s articles on this web site. After all, a Tulip is a Flower! LOL. Just kidding.
But, even with Brian, if you notice his last comment on THE CURE FOR SPIRITUAL DEATH, he states:
“Yes, Tim, but just to confirm, you believe that everyone gets such sufficient enlightenment from God this is enabling them to freely seek or reject seeking God and His mercy. Right?”
The key word that Brian uses is…drum roll please: ENABLING. Now, why would ANYONE need to be ENABLED to believe ANYTHING at all. Enabled? That’s like a BUTTON on a ROBOT that needs to be pushed in order for a ROBOT to be ENABLED to walk. Enabled.
I rest my case. That ENABLING is imputing GRACE in order to BELIEVE. Enabling.
Beleive me, I pay attention to what Brian says. He’s on the same page as Ronnie. Calvinism lite. Enabling. I have fun with that word, becaue I debate people on the word EMPATHY, and I just replace it with sarcasm about enabling bad behavior.
Now, if I am being misleading about the word enabling, I’m sure that Brian will blast me, but if I’m right about his usage, he won’t even want to talk to me.
And I’ll bet that they all believe in original sin, in which GRACE is REQUIRED in order to BELIEVE which is the whole idea behind the DOCTRINES OF GRACE.
Provisionism has a doctrine of Grace, which is IMPUTED in order for you to be able to believe, and Brian calls that…ENABLING.
So get rid of the doctrines of grace. But you can’t do that until you get rid of the doctrine of original sin. Spiritual death happens when you get knowledge of your sin, and God gave you a mind to reason about everything, including salvation.
You don’t need a NUDGE called enabling that would ALLOW belief. Where did this thought of “enabling” come into play? So anxious to debunk Calvinism turns out to be null and void. Free will is non-existant UNTIL enabled. Born a sinner in the womb? Do Provisionists actually believe that? I believe that each human has the same life that Adam and Eve did. Innocent, free spirited, no sin, UNTIL…knowledge of wrongdoing, when you FEEL the guilt in your body, from your head to your toes. You feel it. That’s spiritual death. But to say that one must be ENABLED to beleive in the gospel…uh, no. Nature tells me that all that has to happen is that someone TELLS ME about Jesus, and it’s up to me, without being magically enabled, to believe. But that even if they don’t, Romans 2:14-16 has me covered. It’s what I do with that guilt. Nothing enabled about it.
Ed Chapman
Ed
“Yes, Tim, but just to confirm, you believe that everyone gets such sufficient enlightenment from God this is enabling them to freely seek or reject seeking God and His mercy. ……key word ENABLING
.
br.
Well – I might be wrong – but I wouldn’t interpret Brian’s use of the word “Enable” to involve the Calvinist concept where the person is ZAPPED with some kind of divine spark – or “ENDOWED” with faith which the person otherwise did not have.
.
The next time Brian is commenting – you might want to ask him if that is what he means by “ENABLE”
Br.D. you are correct. No Zap is needed in that enablement, like Arminians and Calvinists teach… but enlightenment is the needed presentation of truth in a clear enough, understandable fashion so that the person is enabled, and indeed must freely decide whether to trust and follow that light, seeking more light and understanding or to reject that truth and self-harden against it. And enlightenment, or presentation of truth from God, is not constantly happening, but it does happen for everyone!
br.d,
No, Brian doesn’t like talking to me, cuz I challenge his beliefs, like a dead horse. But I did notice that he modified his beliefs, uh, I mean clarified.
He can call it anything he wants, enablement, enlightenment (a New Age term), etc. But the fact of the matter is, the doctrines of Grace are plainly seen.
So it begs the question:
Where, in the ORDER OF EVENTS, does grace land?
And what do they call it?
To clarify, what adjective do Provisionists use to describe it?
1. Enabling Grace?
2. Prevenient Grace?
3. Irresistable Grace?
So, we are saved by Grace Through Faith.
Grace is the gift, is it not?
Is faith the gift in Provisionism, as it is in Calvinism?
Is Grace the END RESULT of YOUR FAITH, or
Is Grace the MEANS to an imputed Faith?
And please note, that Original Sin drives this. Without Original Sin in the equation, this conversation would be null and void. So it all begins with a CATHOLIC baggage, for which no one ditched.
This also would negate out the IGNORANT ones who never heard of the gospel, but are covered by Romans 2:14-16 where no “enlightenment” ever took place. And if you read Romans 1 properly, all of the pronouns listed are regarding the Jews, not the average human, for it is the Jews only, at that time, that are without excuse…not the average gentile, pagan or not.
Augustine still Reigns in Provisionism!
Ed Chapman
Ed,
I know Brian over the years – has had dialogs with various people.
.
And with one particular defender of Calvinism – I remember Brian taking the time to patiently go back and forth with that individual.
.
And did so – up to the point where it became obvious that person simply had a vested interest to protect.
When that becomes obvious – dialog essentially becomes fruitless.
.
Brian would gracefully give that person the last word – knowing that was all they really wanted.
Otherwise – if he observed the dialog as fruitful – he would continue with it.
.
He has a lot more patience than I do!!!!
He’s definitely my senior in many ways :-]
br.d
Yes, I’ve seen his politeness, kindness, patience, etc. He’s got the fruit of the spirit stuff! LOL. But it’s the dead horse that I keep pounding on, in certain issues of his beliefs, which I categorically do not buy into. But he’s the teacher on payroll, and it is those to whom I challenge!
I’ve been doing that since I was in the US Navy, when I’d ask my supervisor a technical question, but his answer to me was always the same…
What does the book say?
So, I’d have to answer my own question. And believe me, that took some serious time to study our manuels for me to find out.
I’d challenge my own auditors! And guess what? That kind of questioning authority earned me two Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medals! TWO!
So, I don’t ask my questions to Brian out of a vacuum, or out of ignorance. I’m just not college educated in his chosen denomination, whatever that is…Provisionism?
But I do respect Brian! He just doesn’t want to play with me anymore! LOL
Ed
br.d,
All of my previous questions (not that I need an answer), are a means to determine the most important question:
When does free will begin? Pretend we have a football field where the zero yard line is your birth. A few people in my lifetime lived to be a hundred (Bob Hope, George Burns), so the 100 yard line is death.
Which yard line begins free will?
br.d
Your analogy about free-will and football doesn’t click with me.
.
Also – I’m always concerned about using language that is misleading – and I don’t like the term “Free-Will”
.
I share Peter Van Inwagen’s concern about using that term – because it means so many things to different people – that it serves to create more confusion than anything else.
.
I use the term “Freedom” granted to the creature
.
You should know – I’ve presented this many times before
.
IN CALVINISM:
1) For any [X] which Calvin’s god decrees to infallibly come to pass – he must grant “Freedom” for that [X] to come to pass – or he is a house divided against himself.
.
2) So Calvin’s god *MUST* grant “Freedom” for that which he decrees
.
3) However – there is NO “Freedom” granted to creation for that which is NOT decreed, and that which is CONTRARY to the decree, or any ALTERNATIVE of that which has been decreed.
.
4) So in Calvinism – Adam was granted “Freedom” to [EAT] the forbidden fruit – because that is what was decreed
.
5) But Adam was NOT granted “Freedom” to [NOT EAT] the fruit – because that would be CONTRARY to the decree – and creation is NOT granted “Freedom” to countervail an infallible decree.
.
6) There is never “Freedom” granted to creation to BE/DO OTHER than that which was decreed
.
.
OUTSIDE OF CALVINISM: (Provisionism etc)
We don’t have the doctrine of decrees – so:
.
1) ALTERNATIVES exist within creation
2) Man is granted CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE is left UP TO man
.
So on Provisionism – Adam was granted the “Freedom” to [EAT] and the “Freedom” to [NOT EAT]
And Adam was granted the “Freedom” to choose between those ALTERNATIVES
And that choice was left UP TO Adam
.
This is why Dr. Kenneth Wilson calls “Free-will” In Calvinism NOT-FREE “Free-Will”
br.d,
To me honest, I never knew there was more definitions of Free Will, so I never knew that it means different things to different people. To me, it’s straight forward. That’s why anytime that you get into a discussion with Calvinists about free will, I’m seeing a LOT of words that just goes over my head, such as “libertarian”, and that makes me think of government haters that want to legalize pot! LOL. Hippies that ride motorcycles! Peter Fonda, Cheech and Chong! Robert Redford!
I always thought that Calvinists DON’T believe in it, and that we do. And that in Calvinism, no one has free will ever, because God’s will of everything takes place, eternally, therefore, they have no will of their own, let alone free will.
THEN I read that Calvinists do believe in free will, and that confused me. And that was in discussion about “soup or salad”, but it got much deeper, in that they are a sinners, so they have free will in all of their SINNER DESIRES, anything you want, BECAUSE, all of your desires are evil and wicked…so that’s the free will they believe in, including soup or salad.
But that they DON’T HAVE THE FREE WILL TO SEEK GOD, because they don’t have the ability to.
In order to do THAT, they have to have an IMPUTED GRACE first.
And that is my argument with Brian/Provisionism. In order to FIRST BE ABLE to SEEK GOD, you have to have this ENABLING Grace, or as Brian explains it, you can’t seek God without first being presented with God!
So, even with Brian/Provisionism, a PREAMBLE of GRACE is FIRST needed! You can’t seek God without it. Grace comes before belief. Grace comes before you can make the decision, freely.
I never knew there were so many different TYPES of grace before. This enabling grace comes BEFORE salvation, not as a result of salvation.
I’m saying to CUT OUT THE MIDDLE MAN called IRRESISTIBLE GRACE, PREVENIENT GRACE, or ENABLING GRACE, and you can do good and seek God without grace being given, BECAUSE Grace is as a result of belief, not a preamble to belief.
So again…in Provisionism…
1. Is Grace a MEANS to belief, or
2. Is Grace as a RESULT of belief
My understanding is that you get grace as the gift after once you finally believe, not in order to believe.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Calvinists read that, and they say that faith is the imputed gift through imputed irresistable grace.
Arminians read that, and they say that faith is the imputed gift through imputed prevenient grace.
I read that, and I say that grace is the imputed gift, THROUGH YOUR OWN faith.
What do provisionists say?
Ed Chapman
br.d
The foundational core of Calvinism is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD)
The religion of Islam also incorporates Determinism
And – Atheists have Determinism also.
.
The difference between the Atheist Determinism and Calvinism – is the *DETERMINER*
For the Atheist Determinist – Nature is the *DETERMINER* of whatsoever comes to pass
For the Calvinist a THEOS is the *DETERMINER* of whatsoever comes to pass.
.
But since they are both founded on Determinism – they both share the same logical consequences which come with Determinism.
.
Peter Van Inwagen
-quote
Determinism may now be defined: it is the thesis that there is at any instant exactly one physically possible future. (Oxford Handbook on Free Will)
.
This is why you will hear Brian talk about events can only happen *ONE WAY*
.
In Calvinism – this is the case because an infallible decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
.
.
Determinism is first found in ancient Greek philosophers
Augustine was a NeoPlatonist (follower of the doctrines of Plotinus)
.
Augustine corresponded by letter to a close friend Nebridius, who praises how Augustine’s letters: “speak of Christ, Plato and Plotinus”.
.
Plotinus to doctrines of Plato – and basically re-shaped them into a religious form.
Augustine adored the doctrines of Plotinus throughout his life
.
Ancient Stoicism – a school of Hellenistic philosophy flourished in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome
And the Stoics believed in Determinism
And COMPATIBILISM originates with the Stoics
.
.
Standord Encyclopedia of Philosophy
-quote
Compatibilism is the thesis that free will is compatible with determinism.
.
.
Remember what I stated about creaturely “Freedom” in Calvinism
Calvin’s god *MUST* grant “Freedom” for that which he decrees – or he is a house divided against himself
.
The way this is stated with COMPATIBLISM is – that “Freedom” granted to the creature *MUST* be COMPATIBLE with what has been decreed.
.
So there is NO “Freedom” granted to creation that is CONTRARY or an ALTERNATIVE of that which has been decreed – because that “Freedom” would not be COMPATIBLE with the decree.
.
Thus Adam was granted “Freedom” to [EAT] the forbidden fruit – because doing so was COMPATIBLE with what was decreed.
.
But Adam was NOT granted “Freedom” to [NOT EAT] because that would NOT be COMPATIBLE with what was decreed.
.
So Calvinists do have a form of “Free-will” which is today classified as COMPATIBILISM
.
If it is decreed that you will perform SIN_X at TIME_T
Then you are granted “Freedom” to perform SIN_X at TIME_T
But you are NOT granted “Freedom” to SO OTHERWISE
.
And that is what Peter Van Inwagen means – when he says Determinism is the thesis that there is at any instant exactly one physically possible future.
.
.
For every human event – and every human impulse – the decree grants *ONLY ONE SINGLE PREDESTINED RENDERED-CERTAIN OPTION
.
And the creature is granted NO SAY in the matter of what that option will be
And no ability to refrain.
br.d,
Complicated philosophy. Imagine, spending 50 or more years of your life pondering and writing, and wading paper, and re-writing your beliefs on the topic of…THINKING. Sitting at a desk all day long. And this is why the wife missed her husband? LOL. What a terrible life a philosopher leads. Boring! LOL. And then, calling them experts on thinking! Think about thinking. And write your thoughts about thinking. And people like me who thinks that their thinking about thinking is completely off! LOL
Ed
br.d,
In another comment, I asked,
br.d,
On that same football field:
What yard line is spiritual death in provisionism?
In Calvinism, it would be the ZERO yard line, meaning, already born dead.
In Judaism, for males, it would be the 13 yard line. No knowledge of Good and Evil…until…
In Judaism, for females, it would be the 12 yard line. No knowledge of Good and Evil…until…
Reference
Deu 1:39, Romans 7:7-9 and…Bar/Bat Mitzvah (Age at which the Torah teachings begin).
br.d
COOL!!!! :-]
Love your sense of humor Ed!!
br.d,
And so, I see in a response to me, that you had said:
“OUTSIDE OF CALVINISM: (Provisionism etc)
We don’t have the doctrine of decrees – so:
.
1) ALTERNATIVES exist within creation
2) Man is granted CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) That CHOICE is left UP TO man
.
So on Provisionism – Adam was granted the “Freedom” to [EAT] and the “Freedom” to [NOT EAT]
And Adam was granted the “Freedom” to choose between those ALTERNATIVES
And that choice was left UP TO Adam”
My response:
That answers half of my question, Free Will UP AND TO “spiritual death.
Then what?
Ed
br.d
When we start talking about spiritual death – then we get into an aspect of Calvinism in which they use the TULIP as a *MASK* to make Calvinism *APPEAR* to look like what the NON-Calvinist has.
.
Remember – the foundational core of Calvinism is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as enunciated in Calvin’s doctrine of decrees.
.
John Calvin
-quote
The creatures…are so governed by the secret counsel of god, that *NOTHING HAPPENS* but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed. (Institutes 1. 16. 3)
.
.
So in Calvinism – an impulse cannot happen in your brain – unless that specific impulse was knowingly and willingly decreed.
.
Thus – every impulse that comes to pass within the human brain – comes to pass infallibly.
.
And nature (the human brain) is fallible
And that which is fallible can never *RESIST* that which is infallible.
.
This is where Calvinist gets the notion of Irresistible grace.
But – the TRUTH is – *EVERYTHING* that comes to pass within creation – is made irresistible.
.
So every sinful evil impulse that comes to pass within the human brain – comes to pass irresistibly.
All impulses within the brain – come to pass infallibly – and thus totally outside of the brain’s control.
.
.
Here is something you might find interesting
Go to wikipedia – and look up “Canons of Dort”
.
This is where the 5 points of Calvinism first appear.
Take a look at the 5 points that were identified by the Canon of Dort.
Look specifically at the 1st point.
It is not “Total Depravity”
.
It is TOTAL PREDESTINATION
.
.
The concept of TD can be seen within the 3rd and 4th points joined together
.
So it appears – the original 5 points of Calvinism – did not have TD as the first point
The first point was TOTAL PREDESTINATION
.
Now imagine you are a Calvinist teacher who has the 5 points of Calvinism from the Canon of Dort
And someone asks you to tell them what Calvinism is
And the 1st point you tell them is TOTAL PREDESTINATION
.
This means – every sinful evil impulse that comes to pass within every human brain – is TOTALLY PREDESTINED and cannot be OTHER than what it was decreed to be – and man is granted NO SAY in the matter.
.
How many people do you think would want to embrace that?
.
It appears – some time after the Canon of Dort – Calvinists discovered people were rejecting the doctrine because they reject the idea that every impulse in their brains are TOTALLY PREDESTINED
.
It appears – Calvinists changed the 5 points of Calvinism – and they removed TOTAL PREDESTINATION altogether.
.
They replace it with TD
.
This was designed to *OBFUSCATE* the underlying doctrine – because people were probably rejecting it.
This is why I say – the TULIP was designed to make Calvinism *APPEAR* to be what NON-Calvinists will accept.
br.d,
you had said:
“This is why I say – the TULIP was designed to make Calvinism *APPEAR* to be what NON-Calvinists will accept.”
My response:
I saw a lot of that in the beginning of the spiritual abuse blogs, and when Calvinism was spreading fast. That TULIP made a lot of sense to non-Calvinists, and it confused me as to why people were buying off on it.
Ed
br.d
YES!
.
The typical Bible reading NON-Calvinist – is familiar with “The bondage of corruption” within scripture
.
The “T” in the TULIP is designed to function as a LIE OF OMISSION
A lie of omission – is communication designed to mislead – by omitting critical facts – which if not omitted would not mislead.
.
The Calvinist uses the “T” in the TULIP to falsely attribute man’s abilities/inabilities – and from that man’s eternal destiny – to the state of his nature.
.
But the TRUTH is – both the state of man’s nature – at every nano-second in time – as well as his eternal destiny are TOTALLY PREDESTINED before man is created – and man is granted NO SAY in the matter.
.
Concerning spiritual death:
For the he Bible reading NON-Calvinism – spiritual death is defined as the condition in which mankind has been spiritually separated from God such that his communion with God is cut-off.
.
In the Gospel of John – 1:14 it says:
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…
.
The Greek word for “dwelt” is eskēnōsen – which means “Tabernacle”
.
And we can see this theme in the N.T. where God wants to “Tabernacle” with man.
God wants to regain his communion with man.
.
So Jesus came in the flesh – and died for us – that we could “Tabernacle” with God
Jesus – as the 2nd Adam – came in the flesh – to restore what the 1st Adam lost.
.
.
But that definition of “Spiritual death” does not work for the Calvinist who wants to use TD as a *MASK* to *OBFUSCATE* the fact that every sinful evil impulse in the human brain is TOTALLY PREDESTINED – and man is granted NO SAY in the matter.
.
So Calvinists had to invent a something which would *OBFUSCATE* TOTAL PREDESTINATION and put the blame of man not choosing Christ – onto man – so that they can *OBFUSCATE* the fact that in their doctrine – man is not granted any SAY in the matter of whether he will reject Christ or not – because every impulse in his brain is TOTALLY PREDESTINED.
.
So TD in Calvinism functions as a LIE OF OMISSION.
And thus “Spiritual Death” in Calvinism also functions as a LIE OF OMISSION
.
Calvinists dishonestly use spiritual death (aka TD) to blame man for rejecting Christ – so that they can *OBFUSCATE* the fact that man is granted NO CHOICE in the matter of anything
br.d,
On that same football field:
What yard line is spiritual death in provisionism?
br.d
Now, it’s at this point that someone will probably discuss Lydia with me, or the word regeneration.
That’s for the BLIND JEWS, not the Gentiles.
Ed
br.d
Yes – I have a joke about Calvinism’s version of “Regeneration”
.
Calvin’s god creates each person as a robot having an invisible Floppy-Disk loaded into the forehead
The Floppy-Disk contains the program of divine decrees which determine the impulses within the robots brain
Every person is given a “Total Depravity” program.
.
Regeneration is the process of removing “Total Depravity” Floppy-Disk
And replacing it with a new disk having a new program
The new program is called the “Believe like a Calvinist”
.
Irresistible grace – beep beep 😀
br.d,
And what’s even funnier is everyone is fighting over who is the Elect.
I’m the elect
No, you are not elect, I’m elect,
No, neither of you are elect, I’m elect!
But I’ll respond with NONE OF YOU ARE ELECT, JEWS ONLY ARE!
But God predestined me to be saved!
No he didn’t. He didn’t predestine anyone to be saved. Except for the Jews who reject him…they will be saved! But I’m predestined TO BE conformed to Christ BECAUSE I’m saved.
No, you are not, because God predestined me, before heaven’s foundation that I’d be saved.
And the story goes on!
br.d
Yes – Calvinism really gets crazy with all of its DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS
.
As you know – election in Calvinism – is simply what has been infallibly decreed.
.
John Calvin
-quote
Before men are born their LOT is assigned to each of them by the secret will of god. (Calvin’s Bible Commentaries, 262–263)
.
So if a person is “elect” that is simply the LOT that was assigned to them at the foundation of the world
.
But then the Calvinist is faced with all of the sinful-evil impulses which infallibly and irresistibly come to pass within his brain.
.
Is he going to attribute those sinful evil irresistible impulses to his god?
.
Answer – NO!
He has to figure out a way to *EVADE* attributing sins and evils to his god – because otherwise – he has to acknowledge that his god *AUTHORED* all sinful evil impulses into every person’s program – making people PERFORM sins and evils for his good pleasure – as their assigned LOT in life.
.
But that would make Calvin’s god the AUTHOR of evil – which is something they don’t want to acknowledge
.
So that is why they invented Total Depravity
The invented it as a way of attributing the sins and evils to man – rather than to the deity who AUTHORED the decrees which determined whatsoever will infallibly come to pass within every human brain
.
So Total Depravity functions as a LIE OF OMISSION which the Calvinist uses to justify not telling the WHOLE TRUTH about his doctrine.
.
About 200 years after Calvin’s death – Calvinist learned that if they tell people the TRUTH – that Calvin’s god AUTHORS every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within man’s brain – and makes those impulses come to pass irresistibly within man’s brain – people would reject the doctrine.
.
So they invented Total Depravity to use as a LIE OF OMISSION
By attributing sins to man – and hiding the fact that their god AUTHORED those predestined sins – they’ve figured out a way to make Calvinism *APPEAR* more acceptable to a NON-Calvinist audience.
Ed,
Here is a little parable I like to use when discussing Calvinism
.
There was man name Billy- who was walking down the sidewalk with a friend
They were talking together while walking.
.
Billy looked down the sidewalk and noticed a person walking towards them.
As this person got closer – Billy noticed something very strange about the person’s face
The person was wearing a mask which totally covered his face.
.
When the person got close to them – Billy’s friend recognized the person and stopped to say hello
The person was wearing a full faced mask
The person told Billy’s friend that he was much healthier because was taking a super vitamin product.
.
The person asked Billy’s friend to examine the skin on his face to see if it appeared healthier
Billy’s friend got closer and looked at the person
But what he was looking at – was the mask.
.
Billy’s friend agreed that the person’s face looked much healthier
Billy was shocked – because his friend didn’t’ appear to recognize the fact that he was looking at a mask.
.
How could his friend not discern a mask for the person’s true face??
.
.
This is what I experience – every time I see a Calvinist and a NON-Calvinist arguing over the TULIP
What they are arguing over is not Calvinism’s TRUE face
What they are arguing over is a MASK which the Calvinist wears
.
I’m thinking to myself – I can’t understand how any NON-Calvinist can’t discern the fact that the TULIP is nothing more than a mask the Calvinist wears to hide the *REAL* face of the doctrine.
.
So when we are deliberating over anything having to do with Calvinism’s TULIP – we are not actually addressing the *REAL* difference between Calvinism and NON-Calvinism.
br.d,
I like your parable, because it’s relatable to my discussion in that Catholicism baggage is still carried by Calvinists, and Calvinism baggage is still carried by Provisionists. All sides still love and respect the church fathers for which I despise, which is why they all have Catholic Doctrine, yet none of them believe that Peter was a pope, every protestant rejects that. But they will quote a church father who believed it. And yet, people think Church History is something we need to learn? What? Of what not to do? LOL.
br.d,
There are two verses that the Original Sin folks dance around, and try to ignore, and are generally successful to the audiance in doing so…
Romans 5:13
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
That verse, I’ve seen, is DELETED from the references of the discussion of Original Sin.
And the other:
Deuteronomy 1:39
Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.
They didn’t know, SO THEY GET THE PRIZE! Ignorance wins! Grace? NO. Mercy? NO. FAITH? NO. Separated from God? NO. Lost? NO.
Romans 7:7-9
7 …I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Died! Alive without the KNOWLEDGE of sin…Died once he found out.
Free spirited, EVEN WHILE SINNING, until he knew that what he was doing was a sin. THEN he was in spiritual death.
But, according to Calvinism, grace is needed in order for him to believe in a savior. I mean, according to Provisionism. I mean according to Calvinism, provisionism, Calvinism, provisionism.
If anyone remembers a Jack Nicolson movie!
Ed
Hi Jeff. It is of course important that you study all relevant Scriptures that use the words “elect” or “choose” as it relates to God’s activity with mankind. But just pointing to God’s choice of Israel should be enough to confirm that not all choices by God end up in personal salvation. Being born in the chosen nation of Israel did not guarantee you would be saved from your sins and given everlasting life. Being born a Levite meant you were among the chosen to bear the ark and be a priest before God (1Chr 15:2), but not every Levite will be in heaven.
Also, being chosen to be an apostle did not guarantee that you were already saved with everlasting salvation. Remember Judas! Jesus clearly said – John 6:70-71 NKJV – Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71 He spoke of Judas Iscariot, [the son] of Simon, for it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve. So divine choice can indeed happen for service to God in a specific way without guaranteeing personal salvation with that choice. Right?
Now consider this – The biggest confusion a Calvinist has is in seeing that God’s sovereign choice or rejection of individuals according to Romans 9 was indeed to help fulfill His promise of salvation in Christ, but those choices of individuals did not guarantee their personal salvation or damnation.
The prophecies – The older will serve the younger, or Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated – did not guarantee the personal salvation of Jacob or of everyone else in Israel, nor did it guarantee damnation of Esau or of everyone else in Edom. Just like king Amon being in the “chosen seed” of David as a king of Judah didn’t guarantee his personal salvation (2Chr 33:22-23).
But it is very interesting that there is evidence that Esau later became a believer in the promise that would be fulfilled through his brother Jacob, and interesting that God said that any Edomite was welcome to become believers also. It is also interesting that the most righteous believer of his day, Job, was probably an Edomite! Consider this evidence.
Gen 33:4, 10 But Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him; he threw his arms around his neck and kissed him. And they wept…. “No, please!” said Jacob. “If I have found favor in your eyes, accept this gift from me. For to see your face is like seeing the face of God, now that you have received me favorably.”
Deut 23:7-8 Do not despise an Edomite, for the Edomites are related to you. Do not despise an Egyptian, because you resided as foreigners in their country. The third generation of children born to them may enter the assembly of the Lord.
Job 42:17 (LXX only) “… And he himself (Job) was the son of his father Zare, one of the sons of Esau, and of his mother Bosorrha, so that he was the fifth from Abraham….”
Whom does Esau remind you of in 33:4? Hint Luke 15:20.