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.
I just found a fascinating article from
thegospelcoalition.org
“How Romans 9 Anticipates Objections to Unconditional Election”
August 19, 2020 Justin Dillehay
How would we reply ?
br .d
Hello Jeff – I hope this finds you well.
.
There is a very easy – and very logical answer to the Calvinist claim that election is “Unconditional”
.
Ask any Calvinist the following question:
IS YOUR ELECTION CONDITIONED UPON THE SECRET WILL OF CALVIN’S GOD?
.
John Calvin gives the answer
-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 the TRUTH of the matter is – “Election” in Calvinism is obviously CONDITIONAL
.
Per the doctrine – the vast majority of the total human population *THE MANY* are specifically created for eternal torment in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure
.
Per that doctrine – it logically follows – your eternal damnation is likewise CONDITIONED upon Calvin’s god’s 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)
.
.
Unconditional election is the “U” within Calvinism’s TULIP
And IMHO both the “T” as well as the “U” within Calvinism’s TULIP function as LIES OF OMISSION
.
If that is true then it raises the question – why do Calvinists need to rely on lies of omission?
.
blessings
br.d
Hi Jeff, I very much enjoy BR.D’s reply! My response to calvinistic election… ask them what criteria God used in choosing them; to which they will of course make a plea to mystery. Then ask, could it be so simple as God chooses to save those who place faith in Christ? Also offer… could it be so simple even a child can understand it? I have found that this response tends to leave them speechless. Lastly, I produced a video on badcalvin.com which might help.
Blessings!
br.d
.
BTW – since you now know (from my last post) that “Election” in Calvinism is obviously CONDITIONAL – that brings us to another point.
.
In Calvinism – per the doctrine *EVERYTHING* that comes to pass within creation is *CONDITIONED* upon the secret will of Calvin’s god.
.
1) Every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within every human brain is *FIRST CONCEIVED* in the mind of Calvin’s god.
.
2) Every sinful evil impulse that will come to pass within every human brain is *MADE* to infallibly and irresistibly come to pass
.
CONCLUSION:
The Calvinist per his doctrine – is granted NO SAY and NO CONTROL over any impulse that will come to pass within his brain.
.
.
Calvinists are so blessed to have that! 😀
.
blessings
br.d
About the Bible verse
Romans 8:28 , some claim this verse teaches that God causes all things to happen, even bad things , others say that this verse teaches that God doesn’t cause all things to happen, but that God allows certain things to happen without actually causing it
Plus Biblical Hermeneutics
hermeneutics.stackexchange.com
Has an article
“In Romans 8:28 do “all things work together” or does “God work all things together” for the good?”
Simply to me it’s those who love God not to those who have to irresistibly love Him….
Yes!
In Calvinism – humans are designed to function as OBSERVERS of events infallibly coming to pass.
.
The decree makes all events (both EXTERNAL and INTERNAL to the human brain) come to pass infallibly and thus irresistibly.
.
Humans are not granted any CHOICE in the matter of anything
.
Because an infallible decree does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees.
Thus NO ALTERNATIVE exists for a human to choose.
.
blessings
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
Calvinists do not have the same meanings for words which NORMAL people have.
.
So the words “Allow” and “Permit” do not have the same meanings
.
HERE IS HOW IT WORKS:
1) That which is CAUSED by infallible decree is Allowed/Permitted
2) That which is NOT CAUSED by infallible decree is NOT Allowed/Permitted
.
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)
.
So in Calvinism “Allow” and “Permit” simply mean CAUSE
.
When a Calvinist says his god ALLOWS sinful-evil impulses to come to pass within the human brain
This simply means – Calvin’s god CAUSES sinful-evil impulses to infallibly come to pass within the human brain.
.
An infallible decree does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE
Thus humans are never granted a CHOICE in the matter of anything
Simply because NO ALTERNATIVE exists for any human to choose
.
And even if an ALTERNATIVE did exist (which is impossible) humans would still not have a CHOICE
Because NO ALTERNATIVE impulse would be granted existence within their brain.
.
.
So the critical difference is CHOICE
In Calvinism – humans are never granted a SAY or a CHOICE in the matter of anything
.
Humans are designed to function as OBSERVERS of that which infallibly comes to pass
.
blessings
br.d
On a Christian Internet Group a person typed online this Month
1. “Just because we can intellectually delineate what “we want to do” from what “we intended to do” and from what “we actually do”— doesn’t mean that at the core of our being such delineations actually take place.”
While Another person typed
2. “Does God’s sense of justice trump
His loving and forgiving nature?
When debating with evangelical Christians about the nature of God, both sides begin by agreeing that God is Love, except for the hardcore Calvinists. But when asked why a God of love would consign the majority of the human race to eternal banishment, and unending pain and anguish, in a place called Hell, the response is always the same. God is love, but He is also just. Because He is just, sin must be punished. God loves everyone, but must satisfy the demands of His justice and consign people to everlasting Hell if they don’t repent of their sins and accept His offer of Salvation by Grace through Christ.
On the surface, this line of reasoning seems perfectly acceptable to most evangelical Christians. The problem lies in the area of semantics. Exactly what is meant by the words love and justice? Is love just a emotion, or is it more than that? When you ask these same evangelicals how they would define the word love, most of them would point out that true Godly, agape, love involves more than just feelings or sympathy. It has an active component. Just as faith without works is useless and artificial, love is also meaningless unless it is expressed. Unexpressed love is nothing more than an empty emotion. Jesus said that if we love Him we will keep his commandments. Our actions demonstrate the genuineness of our love. When we love someone in a selfish, self-gratifying manner, we do not call that love. A better name for that emotion would be lust or desire. True love has as its primary focus the needs of the loved one, not the lover. So it is with God. His actions demonstrate the genuineness of His love. It is not about us having to love God and enter into relationship with Him. It is about God first loving us and then entering into a loving relationship with us. We start out as the objects of God’s love, before we are able to return that love. God’s love is focused on us, not Himself. His love for us is unconditional. Christ died for us while we were still sinners. It is the Shepherd who seeks out and finds the sheep, not the other way around.
It is ridiculous to argue that God’s love and forgiveness are somehow trumped by His sense of justice. Every definition of the word justice that I have ever seen involves punishments that are fair and equitable. A fair and just penalty would be proportional to the crime and have as its purpose the rehabilitation of the offender. How can God justly impose an infinite punishment on temporal sins and offer no further opportunity for repentance and rehabilitation? If a human judge imposed a cruel and inhumane punishment for a trivial offense, we would not call that justice. And we certainly would not believe the judge if he were to try to convince us that he was motivated by love for the offender.
If it is unloving for a human being to inflict cruel and inhumane punishments, it would be equally unloving for God to do the same. If human parents are able to love their children unconditionally, why is it not possible God to do the same? If we call people hypocrites who don’t walk their talk, why do we not call God a hypocrite when He acts in the same unloving ways. Does God hold us to a higher standard of behavior than what He holds Himself to? Does God ask us to return good for evil, and then do just the opposite Himself? Of course not, and this is totally supported by the Scriptures.
God’s love and justice are easily reconciled if we correctly define those terms. God’s punishments are perfectly consistent with His loving desire that we eventually repent and receive His mercy and forgiveness. This is impossible for most evangelicals to believe, because they have placed an artificial time limit on God’s love and forgiveness. Nowhere in the Scriptures is it said that repentance and restoration are not possible after death. Yes, it is appointed for a man once to die and after that face judgment, but not infinite torture in Hell. God’s judgments are fair and equitable. All will be fully reconciled with God, through Christ, eventually. There is an abundance of Scriptural support for that. ”
How should we reply to Both Statements
I struggle to follow what comment #1 is attempting to communicate. Perhaps ask for an application. For comment #2 you might question what happens when the post death soul has no desire for God’s relationship? What happens when the murderer who freely chooses to continue to murder and to rebell against God? Is there any post death punishment for the child molester or for Hitler?
br.d
Hello Jeff
.
It is critical to realize – Calvinists have definitions for terms which are often radically different from the standard common definition for those terms.
.
For example – the Calvinist definition for the term “Permit” is “CAUSE”
.
1) What Calvin’s god CAUSES he “permits”
2) What Calvin’s god does not CAUSE – he does not “permit”
.
So within Calvinist literature and statements – when a Calvinist says his god “Permits” sins and evils – what he is actually saying is that his god “CAUSES” sins and evils.
.
So its critical to understand how Calvinists use language differently than NORMAL people understand.
.
.
NOW CONCERNING THE CALVINIST CONCEPT OF DIVINE JUSTICE:
.
Calvin’s god – at the foundation of the world – creates the vast majority of the total human population (THE MANY) specifically for eternal torment – in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
John Calvin explains
-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)
.
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)
.
.
Thus – the Calvinist concept of divine “Love” and divine “Justice” are of a deity who creates people for evil.
.
Calvin’s god – also creates a certain percentage of believers for the lake of fire – for his good pleasure
These are called CHAFF believers
Calvin’s god – also creates new-born babies to be cast alive into the fire of Moloch – for his good pleasure.
.
.
For the Calvinist – these are all expressions of divine “Love” and of divine “Justice”.
So that is how you understand what Calvinists mean by divine “Love” and divine “Justice”
.
Remember – in Calvinism – the decree is what determines everything that comes to pass.
And the decree is NOT based upon the creature or the condition thereof
It is solely WITHIN HIMSELF according to his good pleasure.
.
blessings
br.d
I forgot to add on the Christian Internet Group
Comment #1 was given with an article on the Blog
stillchasinglight.wordpress.com
“Systemic Murder”
March 10, 2025 by Greg Doles
Hope that helps
br.d
Hi Jeff – my interest is helping you to examine things using critical thinking skills – so that your mind is able to discern when statements are misleading or deceptive and/or contain misleading or CLOAKED language.
.
And that will especially be the case with Calvinist statements – because Calvinist quite often statements rely heavily upon misleading language.
.
Calvinists play SHELL-GAMES with words in order to make statements designed to paint FALSE PICTURES.
.
Lies of omission – for example – are ubiquitous within Calvinist statements.
.
So helping you to learn how to not be tricked buy Calvinism’s misleading language tricks is my focus.
.
blessings
br.d
The website
churchlifejournal.nd.edu has an article
“Against Harmonization in Biblical Interpretation”
by Nathan Mastnjak
April 02, 2024
How can we apply this to our Discussion and Debate over
Calvinism , if Calvinism is True or
Partially True ?
I agree that Christians should read and study, discuss and debate the Bible , but when some Christians online and in Public Endlessly Debate Doctrine and Interpretation of the Bible, nitpick and debate, almost in an OCD manner , literally every single word , with many different English Translations and Versions of the Bible, the meanings and Grammar in the Original Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, the type of words
verb, adverb, noun, adjective, if the word is masculine, feminine, neuter
Historical Context, etc .
Isn’t that being a little bit like what the Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes did , ? Didn’t Jesus condemn them for that , studying it too intensely while ignoring the Deeper Spiritual meaning, the True Meaning,
That many Parts of the Bible are to be Taken seriously, but Not Necessarily Literally
Have you argued along the lines of the goodness of God?… How could a good and righteous God send people to hell for not believing in something he created them incapable of believing it?
Hi Jeff – you make a valid point!
.
There is much more to take into consideration concerning TRADITIONS of interpretations.
.
For example – you might find two different Calvinists differing in their interpretations of a particular verse.
Each of them explains the way they derive their given interpretation.
And that kind of exchange can happen also between two people who are familiar with the original Greek language of the text.
.
But in the case of religious groups there is much much more at stake and much much more at risk.
.
Calvinism – for example – is not just a theology – it is a different way of thinking – and it is a different value system.
.
.
There is a very insightful video on Youtube which is called “Asch Conformity Experiment”
.
I would recommend you watch this video
.
It shows how a person can be manipulated within a social group – to the point where that person’s perceptions of reality are altered by SOCIALIZATION strategies used within a group.
.
Another concept to be aware of is called “MILIEU CONTROL”
.
Here is an online definition
-quote
Milieu control is a term popularized by psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton to describe tactics that control environment and human communication through the use of social pressure and GROUP LANGUAGE. Such tactics may include dogma, protocols, innuendo, slang, and pronunciation, which enables group members to identify other members, or to PROMOTE COGNITIVE CHANGES within individuals.
.
So there are SOCIALIZATION processes that are at work within some religious groups that you need to be aware of.
.
This SOCIALIZATION process can be so powerful – that the individuals perception of scripture can be manipulated.
.
The Jehovah’s Witness – or the Mormon for example.
The mind of the individual over time – is manipulated by SOCIALIZATION processes – in order to guarantee every individual within the group is CONDITIONED to read the groups doctrine into the text of scripture.
.
.
I have observed this with numerous Calvinists
.
A Calvinist will make a assertive statement about the doctrine – and claim scripture teaches it.
.
I will ask that Calvinist to provide a verse in scripture which EXPLICITLY states what they are claiming.
.
I specifically want to see how that Calvinist quotes that given verse – so see if he will ALTER the verse while he quotes it.
.
In many cases – that Calvinist will quote a statement which is not actually what that verse says.
.
He is not quoting the actual verse
He is quoting what his mind has been conditioned to READ INTO that verse.
.
He will not alter the text of scripture PHYSICALLY
His mind is conditioned to alter the text of scripture AUTOMATICALLY while his mind is reading it.
.
This is a form of mental conditioning – which is a result of enforced SOCIALIZATION practices.
.
blessings
br.d
Plus a person typed online earlier this year
“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.
Hebrews 6:4-5 is speaking about people who are saved. To prove that, notice that Hebrews 6:6 says, to RENEW THEM AGAIN unto repentance. These people had repented once and were saved.
So since the people in Hebrews 6:4-5 are SAVED people, what does Hebrews 6:6 mean? It’s saying that IF a saved person could lose their salvation, then they could NEVER get it back. It’s saying that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a person to be saved more than once. Why is it impossible? Because like the end of verse 6 says, Jesus would have to die on the cross for our sins ALL OVER AGAIN. And Jesus died ONCE and is ONLY gonna die ONCE (Romans 6:9-10). Salvation is a ONE TIME ONLY thing because Jesus’ death on the cross for our sins is a ONE TIME ONLY thing. Hebrews 6:4-6 PROVES Once Saved Always Saved. God loves you and I do too 🙂 🙂 ❤ ❤✌️.”
What do we think ?
Is “Once Saved Always Saved”
Based upon the correct interpretation of Scripture ?
Or is it possible for a
Truly Saved Christian to backslide and lose their Salvation ?
I think some people are very reluctant to label Calvinism as a
Heresy because it is such a major
part of Christian History, and very large percentages of Christianity throughout history up until Today
Are Somewhat Calvinistic
Some More Calvinist than others
Why can’t the debate over Calvinism be settled once and for all, if Calvinism is True and Correct or perhaps partially true
Like there are Full Preterists and
Partial Preterists when it comes to
Eschatology , but many people have stated that Full Preteristism is clearly False
Hope we all have a
Happy and Safe Easter
Jeff:
I think some people are very reluctant to label Calvinism as a Heresy because it is such a major
part of Christian History, and very large percentages of Christianity throughout history up until Today
.
br.d
Actually Calvinism – from the last time I checked – has never represented more than around 14% of Christianity because of the stigmas which have perennially come with it.
.
The two components which are totally unique to Calvinism – and separate it from all alternatives are
1) DUALISM – in which “Good” and “Evil” are Co-Equal, Co-Necessary, and Co-Complimentary
and
2) DETERMINISM (as enunciated within Calvin’s doctrine of decrees)
.
I am personally convinced the DUALISM within Calvinism – is a derivative of Gnosticism which Augustine never fully rejected.
This makes sense because DUALISM is a well acknowledged aspect of Gnosticism.
.
The DUALISM appears within Calvin’s god’s relationship to evil.
Per the doctrine – every sinful – evil impulse within every human brain is FIRST CONCEIVED within Calvin’s god’s mind – and then MADE to infallibly and thus irresistiblbly come to pass within the human brain – and humans are granted NO SAY in the matter.
.
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 John Piper
-quote
God looks at evil through his wide lens – and sees that evil brings glory to him and this gives him pleasure.
.
.
So you should be able to see why the clear implications have been perennially a stigma for Calvinists.
And Calvinists are very much aware of this stigma and work very hard to craft language designed to make the doctrine APPEAR to be a doctrine of benevolence – when it is predominantly a doctrine of divine malevolence.
.
.
Jeff: Are Somewhat Calvinistic Some More Calvinist than others?
.
br.d
As I explained concerning the STIGMA that comes from these two components DUALISM and DETERMINISM – these are often very unsettling for Calvinists.
It is very common – when I provide quotes from historical Reformed authors – like John Calvin – today’s Calvinists find their statements very unsettling.
.
Here is a statement from a historically popular Reformed scholar
Louis Berkholf
-quote
In our day some scholars who claim to be Reformed balk at this [decretum horribile] doctrine. (Systematic Theology pg 125)
.
Notice here how he is complaining about some scholars who CLAIM to be Reformed – but who balk at the doctrine for emotional reasons.
Here Berkholf points directly to two words from John Calvin “decretum horribil” (The decree of god fills me with a sense of horror)
.
In Calvinism – the decree of god – represents the divine intent.
Why would the divine intent of god fill Calvinists with a sense of horror?
Because – the doctrine stipulates – there is a probability that any Calvinist could have been divinely decieves by Calvin’s god – and will eventually find himself in the lake of fire.
.
That aspect of the doctrine – is an example of the “Good-Evil” DUALISM within the doctrine.
So you can see that Calvinists are going to find aspects of the doctrine unsettling.
.
.
JEff:
Why can’t the debate over Calvinism be settled once and for all, if Calvinism is True and Correct or perhaps partially true
Like there are Full Preterists and Partial Preterists when it comes to Eschatology , but many people have stated that Full Preteristism is clearly False?
.
br.d
The reason for this has to do with the degree to which SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGIES are created by different people.
We can ask the same question about Jehovah’s Witnesses – and Mormons – etc
Why do these belief systems which are so radical continue to capture people?
What is it about these systems that people are drawn to?
How are people drawn into these groups?
.
Jeff:
Hope we all have a Happy and Safe Easter
.
.
br.d
Sincere thanks Jeff!
Your questions today are excellent!!
.
My sincere warm wishes for you – that the Lord will continue to inform you and bless you!
.
your frnd
br.d :-]
I found this comment online today
“Touch Not My Anointed” Is Not a Shield for Corruption
There’s a dangerous narrative floating around the Church right now—one that uses “Touch not My anointed” as a weapon to silence anyone who brings correction, raises concern, or calls for accountability.
Yes, there are YouTube critics and self-appointed watchmen who build platforms by tearing others down. No question. And yes, God’s true servants have always been under attack.
But here’s the part we cannot afford to miss:
In Scripture, it was almost always the prophets and reformers, the very ones sent by God to confront sin and deception, who were “touched”, persecuted, imprisoned, slandered, and even killed.
Jeremiah was beaten and thrown in jail by the priests and prophets he confronted (Jeremiah 20, 26).
Micaiah was slapped and imprisoned for exposing false prophecy to King Ahab (1 Kings 22).
John the Baptist was beheaded for calling out King Herod’s sexual sin (Mark 6).
Stephen was stoned by the Sanhedrin for preaching truth they didn’t want to hear (Acts 7).
Paul was beaten, whipped, stoned, and falsely accused by religious leaders for confronting legalism and exposing wolves (2 Corinthians 11).
Elijah was hunted by Jezebel for dismantling the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18–19).
Jesus Himself—the true and final Anointed One—was crucified by religious men who thought they were defending God.
Let that sink in.
These weren’t self-righteous heresy hunters—they were God’s anointed, sent with a holy assignment to bring correction and call people back to truth. And the ones who “touched” them weren’t outsiders—they were leaders, religious elites, and systems that refused to be held accountable.
So when we see someone calling for truth, exposing abuse, or standing for righteousness in the face of compromised leadership, let’s not be so quick to label them “divisive” or “rebellious.” The line between righteous exposure and slander is real—but so is the line between reverence and enabling.
God never told us to protect titles. He told us to protect truth.
And sometimes, the most dangerous “anointed” are the ones He never sent (Jeremiah 23:21).
Discernment means we can honor true authority and still call out falsehood. We can love the Body and still expose wolves. We can walk in humility and still speak with boldness. The same Jesus who restored Peter also flipped tables and rebuked Pharisees in public.
This isn’t about clout or canceling—it’s about clarity.
We don’t fear man, we fear God. And when we weaponize honor to silence the prophets He sends, we don’t protect the Church—we weaken it.
The ones you call divisive might just be the ones God is raising up to cleanse the temple.”
Do we think this is relevant to our
Discussion about Calvinism , if so how
br.d
Hello Jeff and welcome
.
This is an issue that has more nuance that what this article is alluding too.
.
The phrase “touch God’s anointed” first appears within the story of young David who is being sought after for death by King Saul.
.
David had opportunities to in which God gave Saul into his hand
David could have easily ordered Saul’s death – but he refused saying “I will not touch God’s anointed”.
.
Saul was anointed by God to be the king.
But Saul’s heart was corrupted.
And as a corrupted leader – his leadership brought consequences for the people he was anointed to lead.
.
Saul was not what one would call a *MINISTRY OF LIFE*
Saul was what one would call a *MINISTRY OF DEATH* because of the consequences of his corruption.
.
So now you know – that “Gods Anointed” can be a *MINISTRY OF DEATH*
.
Now concerning those who faithfully followed Saul – and those who rejected following Saul.
.
Those who rejected following Saul – went out into the wilderness where David was hiding
And they committed themselves to follow David
.
Those who left the anointed king Saul to follow David – were labeled “REBELLIOUS” by Saul
.
But scripture did not label them as “Rebellious”
Scripture labeled them as “David’s Mighty Men’
.
So the very people who rejected following the leadership of “God’s anointed” were labeled are “Rebellious”
Because they recognized “God’s Anointed” was a *MINISTRY OF DEATH*
.
.
Now concerning the stoning and murder of the prophets etc.
Yes -they were also “God’s anointed”
But the difference between them and Saul – was obedience to God.
Where they were obedient – Saul was disobedient.
.
In 1 Samuel 15:23 – the prophet Samuel tells Saul “Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft”
.
Saul was essentially trying to engage in a kind of “quid pro quo” with God—offering religious actions (like sacrifices) in exchange for God’s favor, while ignoring obedience to God’s actual command.
.
This is the same exact sin – of the prophet/diviner Balaam.
.
Balaam is a non-Israelite prophet/diviner summoned by Balak, king of Moab who wants Balaam to curse Israel as they approach the Promised Land.
.
Balaam is also “God’s anointed”
Now take a look at these verses concerning Balaam who is “God’s anointed”
2 Peter 2:15, Jude 1:11, Revelation 2:14
.
The scripture itself warns about following after corrupted leaders – even those whom God “anoints”.
.
.
Now this brings us to the problematic issue of corrupt Christian ministries.
.
You may be interested in reading “Churches That Abuse” by Ronald M. Enroth, first published in 1992
.
Enroth sites documented stories of “God’s Anointed” ministries who were *MINISTRIES OF DEATH*
In some of those cases – just like as it was with those men who left king Saul to be with David and were labeled *REBELLIOUS* people within churches with corrupted ministries rejected those ministries – because they could discern those ministries were corrupted.
.
In some of those cased – the corrupt ministry pointed his finger at the people who were leaving and said “Touch not God’s anointed”.
.
This was the corrupted ministries way of trying to retain control.
.
So what you need in this case – is *DISCERNMENT*
God has not called people to blindly follow after Christian ministries.
.
Like young David who *DISCERNED* that Saul was a corrupted ministry – he would not “Touch God’s Anointed”
This simply means – he would not do anything to harm Saul.
.
WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE WHO BLINDLY FOLLOW A MINISTRY OF DEATH:
.
The scripture does not provide the exact number of men who died following Saul in the war with the Philistines on Mount Gilboa.
.
But we can estimate that it was up to 10 thousand men.
.
So that is the consequence of following a corrupted person – even when the person is “God’s anointed”
.
Blessings
br.d
On June 5, 2025
phys.org has an article
“AI reveals hidden language patterns and likely authorship in the Bible”
by Duke University
edited by Sadie Harley, reviewed by Robert Egan
Can we apply this to our Discussion , can AI properly Interpret the Bible where even the human scholars are confused and baffled
br.d
Hello Jeff – hope this finds you well.
.
There are a few things to take into consideration here.
.
Firstly – people have been finding language patters especially within the Old Testament for many years now.
Although these patterns are very interesting – they can also be identified as “statistical anomalies” which follow the same “data patterns” that are found with “sooth-saying”, “Palm reading”, “Nostradamus writings” etc.
.
In other words – that have the ability to be “POSSIBLY” correct – just based on “statistical probability” IF we bend their interpretations enough to MAKE THEM APPEAR TO FIT historical facts.
.
.
Another issue concerning AI today – is that people are finding – even though it is as sophisticated as it currently is – it can still make mistakes.
.
.
However – I think the answer to your question – “Can we apply this to our Discussion” is YES!
.
If what we are talking about – is INTERPRETATIONS PLAGUED WITH CONFIRMATION BIAS which are designed to make highly desired concepts APPEAR TO FIT with scripture – then we have a phenomenon which can be found within the Calvinist interpretation of scripture.
.
.
Bible scholar N.T. Wright jokes about Calvinism’s usage of scripture – where he says “Roman’s 9 has become Calvinism’s HAPPY HUNTING GROUND
.
He makes a joke of it – but he also realizes – it is a serious problem.
.
This is a process that is sometimes called DATA MINING within scripture
The individual is has a PRE-CONCEIVED NOTION that he wants to find within scripture.
.
the desire to find that pre-concieved notion is so intense that it makes the human mind see things which are not really there.
It is a form of “motivated reasoning” or “confirmation bias”.
Anyone can do this with scripture – or any text that is like scripture.
If the human mind as a pre-conceived idea about something – and it wants scripture to affirm it – the human mind will tend to see those things within scripture – even when they are not really there.
.
.
That which is totally unique to Calvinism – is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD)
So the Calvinist mind has an intense desire to see EDD within scripture.
.
When the human mind has that intense a desire to see something within scripture – the mind will convince itself that it does see those things – even when they don’t actually exist.
.
.
Calvinists especially have to deal with verses within scripture which contradict their belief system.
.
What the Calvinist does with those contradictions – is to convince himself they do not exist .
.
.
An easy example of that phenomenon would be a person who believes the sun orbits the earth.
But they read verses within scripture which contradict their belief.
And they don’t want to let go of the belief
So they tell themselves – it is not a contradiction – but rather a divine mystery – or a divine inscrutability
.
So I think the answer is YES – we can apply that cognitive phenomenon to our discussion about Calvinism.
.
blessings!
br.d
effectualgrace.com has an article
“Understanding Romans 10:17”
Feb 26, 2012
by John Samson
How should we reply ?
The article gives a
Calvinist Reply to the
Bible verse Romans 10:17
which is often used against
Calvinism
br.d
Hi Jeff – I believe Brian has already addressed that by looking at the words used within the Koine Greek ( language of the N.T authors)
.
This question actually goes back to your previous question – in which we were discussing CONFIRMATION BIAS found within the Calvinist reading of scripture.
.
This is where I provided the joke from N.T. Wright “Romans 9 is Calvinism’s HAPPY HUNTING GROUND”
.
.
The first thing we recognize is what separates Calvinism from all of its alternatives is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as enunciated 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)
.
Accordingly:
1) A PERCEPTION cannot happen within a human brain – unless that PERCEPTION was knowingly and willingly decreed.
.
2) That decree being infallible – does not grant anything within creation to be OTHER than what it was decreed to be.
.
3) Therefore – the human brain is not granted the ability to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE from those PERCEPTIONS which have been decreed
.
.
So lets say it is decreed that you will have the PERCEPTION that Jehovah’s Witness doctrine is the true gospel.
.
1) It is now infallibly fated that you will infallibly PERCEIVE Jehovah’s Witness as the true gospel
.
2) That decree – being infallible – will not permit your brain to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE
.
3) You believe Jehovah’s Witness is the true gospel – NOT BECAUSE IT IS – but because that is the belief that was decreed for you to have.
.
4) Your brain will not be granted the ability to DISCERN that belief as a FALSE belief – simply because your brain is not permitted the ability to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE than what the decree has infallibly decreed your brain to PERCEIVE.
.
.
CONCLUSION:
In Calvinism – the human brain is not granted the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE because every PERCEPTION is determined by antecedence factors (infallible decree) which is totally outside of the brain’s control – and the brain is not permitted to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE
.
So per Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees:
1) The Calvinist brain is not permitted the ability to discern TRUE faith from FALSE faith.
2) The only faith which can exist within his brain – is the faith that Calvin’s god decreed
3) That decree does not permit the Calvinist’s brain to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE
4) Thus the function of discernment is not permitted.
.
In Calvinism – you believe what you believe – NOT because it is TRUE – but because that is the belief that was decreed for you to infallibly have.
.
So if it is decreed that you will believe Jehovah’s Witness doctrine is the TRUE gospel – then your brain will not be permitted to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE. And you will not be permitted the ability to discern that belief as FALSE
.
.
Since that is the case with what Calvinism’s doctrine stipulates – who would want it???
.
Blessings :-]
br.d
Other articles I found
About Calvinism and the verse
Acts 16:31
rfpa.org has an article
“Considerations on Acts 16:30-31”
30 November, 2021 by Reformed Free Publishing Association
philippians19.org has an article
“Brief Statement on Calvinism”
br.d
Jeff – I think it should become totally obvious by now – that all of these arguments by Calvinists – are simply strategies to try to make EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) somehow APPEAR TO FIT with scripture.
.
The Calvinist has to be extremely inventive in that process.
.
But if you read through my last post to you concerning the fact that the Calvin’s doctrine of decrees makes it the case that the Calvinist brain is not permitted the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE on any matter – then that should be enough of a problem for you to know Calvinism is a SELF REFUTING belief system – trying make itself APPEAR Biblical and rational.
.
Blessings!
br.d
Jeff – while you are asking people here to address various Calvinist content – its only fair that someone here can ask the same of you.
.
There is a Youtube video which is titled: The Deity of Deception Argument is, in fact, POWERFUL
.
This argument is focused solely on Calvinism and its doctrine of decrees.
Please watch this short video and let us know what your thoughts are on it.
.
Thanks in advance
blessings
br.d
Legendary American Pastor
John MacArthur passed away at 86
He was Calvinist Baptist , what do we think of his arguments for Calvinism ? How would we respond ? Overall he was a great Pastor, a giant in the Christian Faith , even if we don’t agree with everything he taught and preached
He was 25 years older than me, and this much I can say. I’m glad I never knew who he was growing up. I never knew anything at all about Calvinism, let alone John MacArthur until about 2011, give or take a year. I have seen him on Larry King Live once, but I don’t remember when, or the context as to why he was on that show, but I could tell that there just wasn’t something right about him.
Some of us who have commented on this blog believes that the god of CalvinISM is not the God that we worship. I say “ISM” for a reason, as to not just isolate John Calvin. I mean, do we EMBRACE the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, etc., being all inclusive and all, calling them “brothers in Christ”? No, we don’t. So why Calvinists? What’s the LINE? What’s the List? What’s the criteria?
Maybe the congregation is DUPED, but what excuse do those at the pulpit have? Eventually, some in the congregation gets hooked.
If I were to make a meme, mine would say that God showed John the ballot box, and told John, “I didn’t elect you”.
As a non-Calvinist, I don’t believe that God “elects” anyone at all…for salvation. That’s not what “elect” is about. So, it’s NOT derogatory to John. But it’s something that would rile up Calvinists who believes that. Elect is not about salvation. There, I said it twice.
Ed Chapman
Hello Jeff,
Concerning your question of John MaCArthur – there has been for a while – a certain portion of Calvinists who saw MacArthur as a COMPROMISED Calvinist.
.
This points to a well-known conflict within Calvinism – which has to do with the Calvinist mind-set
It is a conflict between the stoic rational mind-set vs the emotional mind-set.
.
Within a Reformed Seminary – this phenomenon would be described as (John Calvin the theologian vs John Calvin the pastor)
.
I don’t know if you are a Star Trek fan – but this same conflict was consistent between Mr. Spock and Dr. MCcoy
.
Spock was predominantly rational and stoic – and not given to emotions
Dr. McCoy was often times emotional
.
Spock would be asked a question – and he would know the correct answer to the question.
He would state the facts without emotions
Dr. McCoy would often times be insulted by those very facts
.
.
Within Calvinism – you have two persons
You have the theologian – who is doctrine-facing
The Calvinist theologian earns respect by the degree to which he is CONSISTENT and FAITHFUL to the doctrine.
.
The Calvinist pastor however is HUMAN-FACING
And humans are often times full of emotions.
.
Here is a quote from Calvinist theologian Louis Berkholf
Louis Berkholf (Calvinist)
-quote
In our day some scholars who *CLAIM* to be Reformed *BALK* at this [decretum horribile] doctrine. (Systematic Theology pg 125)
.
Here Berkolf – the Calvinist theologian – is criticizing others who *CLAIM* to be Calvinist theologians – because they *BALK* at facts which are stipulated by the doctrine.
.
These words [decretum horribile] are from John Calvin – who stated that the intent of god fills him with a sense of HORROR.
.
This is because – the doctrine stipulates a god who creates new-born babies specifically to be cast alive into the fire of Moloch – for his good pleasure
And the majority of those babies will then be cast into the fire of eternal torment – also for Calvin’s god’s good pleasure.
.
You can understand how this is going to be responded to – by Calvinists who are emotional.
Any Calvinist minister who stands before a congregation and simply states the facts – is like throwing bombs into the midst of his congregation.
.
.
John MacArthur was known within Calvinist circles as COMPROMISING the doctrine for the sake of making Calvinism *APPEAR* to be a benevolent belief system.
.
So Calvinists who are very strict and uncompromising about the doctrine – would see John MacArthur as dishonest – because he would paint *FALSE PICTURES* of the doctrine in order to make it palatable to his congregation.
.
.
.
Reformed author – Oliver D. Crisp addresses this issue in his book “Deviant Calvinism”
Calvinist John Piper has often warned against the danger of “soft” or “compromised” Calvinism.
Calvinist author J. I. Packer warns about “superficial” or “shallow” Calvinism which compromises divine sovereignty for the sake of human sensibilities.
Calvinist Michael Horton warns about the tendency by Calvinist ministries to compromise the doctrines for the sake of wider acceptance.
Calvinist Mark Dever warns about diluted, compromised versions of Calvinism.
.
The doctrine – is predominantly a doctrine of divine malevolence.
Any time a Calvinist ministry tries to make it *APPEAR* to be a doctrine of benevolence – that Calvinist is being dishonest.
.
So a criticism laid against MacArthur by *NON-COMPROMISING* Calvinists – is that he would be seen as lacking honesty.
And I personally agree with that assessment.
.
blessings
br.d
As a quick follow-up on MacArthur being dishonest there is a good example found on Youtube.
.
MacArthur is standing before his congregation and a certain girl who is a member of his congregation is standing at a microphone asking a question.
.
This girl is having an emotional struggle with the doctrine.
.
She is asking MacArthur about how she can know whether or not she was created for salvation or created for damnation.
.
This is a question that affects not only this girl – but it affects the whole congregation.
.
Is MacArthur going to tell this girl the TRUTH?
.
The doctrine stipulates – two TYPES of believers are created – and these two TYPES of believers are classified as WHEAT and CHAFF believers.
.
A WHEAT believer – is a person who was created for salvation.
A CHAFF believer – is a person who was created for damnation.
.
The doctrine stipulates – a *FEW* believers are created as WHEAT believers – and *MANY* believers are created as CHAFF believers.
.
The CHAFF believer – is divinely deceived
Calvin’s god gives the CHAFF believer a FALSE FAITH and FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation.
This believer will go through their whole life – experiencing FALSE PERCEPTIONS of salvation – and eventually wake up in the lake of fire – where they will then realize what they were created for.
.
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)
-quote
He illumines *ONLY FOR A TIME* to partake of it; then he….strikes them with even greater blindness (Institutes 3.24.8)
.
-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)
.
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)
.
.
If MacAurthur is going to *TELL THE TRUTH* to his congregation – he has to inform them – that every one of them has a statistical probability of having been given a FALSE SENSE of salvation – and they were created for the lake of fire – for Calvin’s god’s good pleasure.
.
.
MacAuthor does not *TELL THE TRUTH* to his congregation.
His answer is for this girl to look within herself and look for indicators of whether or not she loves god.
If she sees indicators that she loves god – then she can have an assurance that she is a WHEAT believer.
.
MacAuthor at some level – recognizes this is a lie.
So he is not *TELLING THE TRUTH* to his congregation – in order to placate human emotions.
.
So this would be an example of dishonesty.
.
blessings
br.d
Wait a minute …. Hold your horses. This doesn’t stop at judgement day.
If Calvi-god controls every last thing from eternity to eternity, wouldn’t he also control hell for all eternity? Every last flicker of flame, every spirit-crushing humiliation, every … Well, you get my drift.
I can’t imagine a god who so meticulously choreographed our earthly existence would then turn over execution of his eternal, righteous, holy, perfect vengeance to anyone else.
So will Calvi-god actively torment the damned for eternity? And, of course, in love and for HIS GOOD PLEASURE AND GLORY!
Hello Nick and welcome
Your comment makes sense – because as Calvinism stipulates “NOTHING” can happen that has not been knowingly and willingly decreed
So that would be the case for eternity.
.
This also points to the way Calvinism’s TULIP is designed to mislead people.
.
Take for example – Perseverance of the Saints
.
What is *REALLY* persevering here?
The saints eternal destiny has been infallibly fixed at the foundation of the world
That which is infallible – can never NOT be infallible
.
Everything that is decreed will “Persevere” as long as the decree is in effect
So in *REALITY* it is the decree that is “Persevering” and not the saint.
.
Why then do Calvinist’s call it “Perseverance of the saints”?
.
Because Calvinist ministries are concerned that if the Calvinist recognizes his election is infallible – he can sin as much as he wants
Nothing within creation can alter his eternal destiny.
It doesn’t matter how much he sins.
.
If he is elect – then he is elect infallibly – and his election will infallibly “Persevere”
If he is NOT elect – then he is NOT elect infallibly – and his damnation will infallibly “Persevere”
.
So we have “Perseverance” of sins – and “Perseverance” of evil – and “Perseverance” of damnation and torment for eternity.
.
It becomes easy to see – the TULIP is used more as a tool of obfuscation then anything else.
.
blessings!
br.d
I found this article from
bobrogers.me
“Why John Calvin was wrong about Romans 9” by Bob Rogers
Sep 17, 2013 Opinions on this article ? But some Calvinists will still disagree with this article and insist Calvin was right about Romans 9
Also
I remember how in my 7th grade American History Class in Junior High School , the Teacher mentioned a
Protestant group in early American History , possibly before 1776 that believed that before a person is born it is already predetermined if they are going to Heaven or Hell when they die and Nothing the person does or doesn’t do in their life will change that , so the person finds out when they die where they are going , I forgot the name of that group
But any opinions about that Theology
Hi Jeff,
I hope this finds you well
.
The theological system you are referring to is Calvinism – or some derivative of it.
.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
-quote
“John Calvin … espouse[s] the view [of THEOLOGICAL DETERMINISM] … theological determinism is often associated with Calvinist or Reformed theology, and many proponents of Calvinism put their view in terms of the specificity of God’s decree, the efficaciousness of God’s will, or the extent of God’s providential control.”
.
Dr. James N. Anderson (Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte NC)
-quote
“It should be conceded at the outset, and without embarrassment, that Calvinism is indeed committed to DIVINE DETERMINISM the view that everything is ultimately determined by God…..take it for granted as something on which the vase majority of Calvinists uphold and may be expressed as the following: “For every event [E], God decided that [E] should happen and that decision alone was the ultimate sufficient cause of [E].”
.
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)
.
.
Now – consider how John Calvin is going to understand the concepts of THE MANY and THE FEW within the N.T.
.
Calvin is going to conclude “THE MANY” are by design – and “THE FEW” are by design.
.
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 the view of predestination that you are reading about – has its origins in Calvinism.
.
John Calvin – got his theology from Augustine
Augustine – embraced doctrines of Plotinus (Neo-Platonism)
.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
-quote
Augustine incorporates doctrinal features deeply rooted in Neoplatonic philosophy……
.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
–
Within the doctrines of Plotinus (Neo-Platonism) destiny is a network of DETERMINISTIC rules that operate almost automatically and unintentionally, responding to a kind of ‘hypothetical necessity,’ where the same causes inexorably produce the same effects…”
.
.
So you should be able to connect the dots here and recognize Calvinism is a combination of Christian and Platonic doctrine. And that is where the Calvinist concept of “predestination” comes from.
.
Blessings
br.d
A Christian on carm.org typed online in
2022
“One thing I have noticed is that Calvinist expositors never seem to bring Jeremiah 18:1-11 into their discussion of Romans 9. It’s truly remarkable in light of the fact that Paul is almost certainly alluding to this OT passage when he uses the metaphor of the potter and the clay. In reading it, it becomes apparent that Jeremiah, in talking about what we might call “the potter’s freedom”, is referring to God’s ongoing formation of our circumstances, not our wills. In fact, this passage in Jeremiah only really makes sense if we assume the point to be that God manipulates our circumstances in response to our free will choices. Read it and tell me what you think.
The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: “Arise and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause you to hear My words.” Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make. Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it. “Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.” ’ ”
Now doesn’t this make more sense of Romans 9 than the traditional Calvinist interpretation? Paul even brings Pharaoh into the discussion and cites Exodus 9:16 where God says “But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” But this refers not to God acting on Pharaoh’s will, but on his circumstances. This is apparent from the preceding verse: “Now if I had stretched out My hand and struck you and your people with pestilence, then you would have been cut off from the earth.” The point of Romans 9, like Jeremiah 18, is that God manipulates human circumstances in reaction to what they freely choose to do so as to bring about His purposes in the earth.”
While in 2024 on a different Christian website
A person typed
“One passage that I see Arminians point to frequently in order to try to argue against the Reformed interpretation of Romans 9 is Jeremiah 18:1-11. They say that in Rom. 9:19-22, Paul is referring back to this OT prophecy, which then colors how we ought to interpret Romans 9. God states in Jer. 18:7-10 that if a nation that God had declared that He was going to judge turns from its wickedness, He would relent of the disaster He had declared against it, and that if a nation that God had declared that He was going to do good to turned from its righteousness, He would relent from the good that He declared for it (similar to Ezekiel ch. 18). They state that this demonstrates that God doesn’t shape “vessels of wrath” and “vessels of mercy” solely based on His free and sovereign will, but conditioned upon who will repent and who will not.
I find this Arminian viewpoint to be unconvincing — it seems to get dangerously close to saying that God’s decrees are mutable, and it is far more likely that Paul is referring to texts in Isaiah (Isa. 29:16; 45:9; 64:8) than this text in Rom. 9:20-22. However, I’m not sure how to formulate an exegetical and theological argument against their claim. Any help?”
Once Again, I’m like how in this life can we humans ever know for certain which interpretation is correct ?
Could Artificial Intelligence correctly interpret the Bible , has it been tried ?
The way I see Romans 9… it has nothing to do with calvinism’s chosen to be saved, chosen to damnation. Nothing to do with sin or salvation. But it seems that everyone wants to talk about that when it’s not that.
Jeremiah is a prophet, and the natural sometimes needs manipulation to happen in order for the prophesy to come true.
But setting that aside, two different people’s are being discussed in Romans 9.
Jews, and the Pharoah.
Why was the Pharaoh mentioned?
To choose him for damnation? No. Destruction is not the eternal destiny. Damnation is. But he was not condemned.
Romans 5:13… tell me, does Romans 5:13 apply? Yes, or no?
How about those who died in the flood of Noah’s day?
Br.d
Hello Jeff – I hope this finds you well.
.
One thing you are eventually going to discover with the Calvinist conceptions of divine control “divine potter” is that they will eventually find it unpalatable – and will be DOUBLE-MINDED about it.
.
For example – take the Calvinist view of the “divine potter” (i.e. divine control) in regard to human PERCEPTION.
.
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)
.
What does this tell us about ALTERNATIVES from that which is decreed?
They do not exist within creation – because *NOTHING* exists that is not knowingly and willingly decreed
.
Can anything within creation be OTHER than that which was decreed?
No – because *NOTHING* exists that is not knowingly and willingly decreed
.
Can anything within creation be CONTRARY to that which was decreed?
No – because *NOTHING* exists that is not knowingly and willingly decreed.
.
.
THUS:
A PERCEPTION cannot exist within a human brain – unless that PERCEPTION was decreed
And that decree does not grant the human brain to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE
.
The human brain is not granted a CHOICE between ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS – because ALTERNATIVES OPTIONS are CONTRARY to the decree – and therefore do not exist.
.
.
THUS:
In Calvinism – the “divine potter” controls every PERCEPTION that will be granted within the human brain.
.
The Jehovah’s Witness PERCEIVES his doctrine to be TRUE
Not because it is
But because that is the PERCEPTION which Calvinism’s “divine potter” decreed the JW will have.
.
The Mormon PERCEIVES his doctrine to be TRUE
Not because it is
But because that is the PERCEPTION which Calvinism’s “divine potter” decreed the Mormon will have
.
The Calvinist PERCEIVES his doctrine to be TRUE
Not because it is
But because that is the PERCEPTION which Calvinism’s “divine potter” decreed the Calvinist will have.
..
.
You should be able to see from this – that human PERCEPTIONS in Calvinism – are not TRUTH-BASED
They are DECREE-BASED
And the human brain is not granted the ability to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE
.
THUS:
The human function of discernment is not permitted.
The JW’s mind is not permitted to discern the fact that his PERCEPTIONS are FALSE
The Mormon’s mind is not permitted to discern the fact that his PERCEPTIONS are FALSE
The Calvinist’s mind is not permitted to discern the fact that his PERCEPTIONS are FALSE
.
.
THUS
A consequence of Calvinism’s “divine potter” doctrine – is that the human mind is not granted the ability to discern TRUE from FALSE
.
You believe what you believe – not because it is TRUE – but because Calvinism’s “divine potter” decreed that is what you will believe.
.
Gregory Koukl
-quote:
The problem with determinism, is that…..rationality would have no room to operate. 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 were. Everyone of our thoughts and opinions would have been predetermined by factors completely out of our control. Therefore in practice, arguments for determinism are self-defeating.”
.
.
THUS
Calvinism is a self-refuting belief system.
.
Blessings
br.d
br.d , Great to hear from you as well
redeeminggod.com has an article
“Understanding the Potter and the Clay in Romans 9”
By Jeremy Myers
I think it makes good points
br.d
Thank you Jeff
.
Can you summarize a few of the points that you consider good?
.
Can you grab a few quotes from that article that you can copy and paste here – which you consider good points?
THE ACHILLES’ HEEL OF CALVINISM (THE LACK OF ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES)
.
Calvinism entails a world in which nothing exists unless it is decreed to exist
An infallible decree does not grant any ALTERNATIVE from that which it decrees
.
Thus ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES do not exist within the Calvinist’s world
.
This is a major dilemma for the Calvinist because he has a critical need for ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES to exist.
.
The lack of genuine ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES is often identified as the Achilles’ heel of Calvinism, especially when it comes to:
– Authentic human choices
– The human ability to deliberate
– The human ability to discern TRUE from FALSE
– Human moral responsibility
– Meaningful human accountability
.
WHY ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES MATTER SO MUCH:
1. Moral Responsibility Requires Alternatives
Philosophically and intuitively, for a person to be truly responsible for an action, they must have been able to *DO OTHERWISE*.
Without genuine ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES, genuine human responsibility becomes incoherent.
.
2. The Human Experience of Choice
The normal human lived experience is one in which humans are granted the abilities of deliberation, choice, regret, and sometimes resistance to inclinations.
.
3. Without real ALTERNATIVES, these human perceptions and experiences become mere illusions (infallibly decreed FALSE Perceptions)
.
4. Theological Implications
If God predetermines every thought, desire, and impulse within the human brain without exception, then:
– Punishing humans for things which they have no control over comes off as an ABNORMAL form of justice.
– Concepts of salvation, repentance, and faith lose their NORMAL meanings.
.
HOW CALVINISTS RESPOND TO THESE PROBLEMS:
Compatibilism:
Calvinists redefine freedom as “freedom to act according to one’s nature/desires.”
.
Critics say this sidesteps the real issue by changing the meanings of words – giving words such as “deliberation”, “Choice”, “Contingency” and “Freedom” ABNORMAL meanings.
.
Mystery / Inscrutability:
The Calvinist will eventually appeal to mysteries and inscrutabilities as the answer.
We humans cannot grasp how Calvinism’s divine control and human freedom coexist.
.
Critics call this a philosophical evasion.
.
.
Calvinists will appeal to Secondary Causation:
Humans are “real” causes under divine primary causation.
.
Critics point out – that this does not restore ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES.
The Calvinist is observed going about his office *AS-IF* ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES exist in contradiction to the very divine sovereignty they claim to embrace.
.
.
LIVING IN CONTRADICTION TO ONE’S BELIEF SYSTEM:
The Calvinist ends up having to deny his belief system – and live *AS-IF* ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES exist in order to retain a sense of human normalcy.
Critics point out – the Calvinist is forced to live in a state of DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS – and this is why Calvinist language is a language of DOUBLE-SPEAK.
.
SUMMARY:
THE CRITICAL PROBLEM FOR THE CALVINIST:
1) A world in which ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES do not exist is a world in which the human functions of deliberation and choice-making do not exist.
.
2) The Calvinist cannot live in a world in which the human functions of deliberation and choice-making do not exist and at the same time retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
3) Attempts to preserve “deliberation”, “contingency” and “human choice-making” within the Calvinist framework collapse into semantic tap-dance routines (i.e. DOUBLE-SPEAK)
.
blessings
br.d
On YouTube there is a video titled
“Jesus Didn’t Want Followers – He
Wanted THIS”
August 13, 2025
by
The Esoteric Path , the video is
21 minutes and 51 seconds long
I watched it and am not sure what to think , how can we apply the content of the video to Calvinism & Christianity overall , is Calvinism “Esoteric” in a sense ?
Hello Jeff and good morning.
.
I will make a deal with you.
I will take a look at the video you suggest and give you my analysis.
.
In return for me doing that – you will take a look at the following argument from Dr. Timmothy Stratton and give your analysis.
.
.
Dr. Timothy Stratton presents a logical argument which shows a major flaw in Calvinism.
The argument is called the “Deity of Deception”
.
The argument follows:
.
1) The foundational core of Calvinism is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) which stipulates that nothing exists or happens within creation unless it was decreed by a deity.
.
2) That decree is infallible and does not grant any ALTERNATIVE to exist or happen within creation from what it was decreed to be
.
3) If EDD (Calvinism) is true – then a deity determines all PERCEPTIONS which will exist within all human minds – and this includes all FALSE PERCEPTIONS.
.
4) Thus if EDD (Calvinism) is true – then the deity of Calvinism is the ultimate source of deception because he determines people to have FALSE PERCEPTIONS – by a decree which does not permit their minds to discern the fact that those PERCEPTIONS are FALSE
.
5) Since the human mind is not permitted to discern FALSE PERCEPTIONS as FALSE – it follows – the human mind is not permitted to differentiate a TRUE PERCEPTION from a FALSE PERCEPTION.
.
6) Since the human mind is not permitted to differentiate a TRUE PERCEPTION from a FALSE PERCEPTION – then the human mind cannot know if anything it thinks on any matter is TRUE – because it has no way of knowing if its PERCEPTIONS on that matter are FALSE
.
.
FOR EXAMPLE:
7) The Jehovah’s Witness, and the Mormon, and the Catholic PERCEIVE and BELIEVE their doctrine is TRUE – not because it is – but because those are the PERCEPTIONS Calvin’s deity determined them to have.
.
8) The Jehovah’s Witness, the Mormon, and the Catholic all have PERCEPTIONS established by infallible decree – which does not permit their minds to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE.
.
9) This would also have to be the case for every Calvinist.
They will PERCEIVE and BELIEVE their doctrine is TRUE – not because it is – but because those are the PERCEPTIONS and BELIEFS Calvin’s deity determined them to have.
.
10) The minds of the Jehovah’s Witness, the Mormon, the Catholic and the Calvinist – and all other humans – are not permitted to PERCEIVE OTHERWISE.
.
11) The decree does not grant their minds the ability to discern the fact that their PERCEPTIONS are FALSE.
.
CONCLUSION:
EDD (Calvinism) destroys itself – and can be recognized as a self-refuting belief system
Because it stipulates a deity who decrees FALSE PERCEPTIONS within every human mind – and does not permit the human mind to discern those PERCEPTIONS as FALSE.
.
Thus in Calvinism you have no way of knowing if anything you PERCEIVE or BELIEVE is TRUE
This shows Calvinism to be a self-refuting belief system.
.
Read through these steps – slowly so you can grasp each one.
.
blessings
br.d
Hi Jeff – here is my analysis as promised
.
The first thing to note is how he is using the word “Follow” or in the case of believers “Followers”
.
He is not using this word literally.
He is not actually saying Jesus did not want “Followers”
He is talking about the WAY people are practicing church.
.
Jesus uses the actual phrase “Follow Me” more than a dozen times in the N.T.
.
The Apostle Paul uses this model also:
1 Corinthians 4:16 (KJV)
“Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.”
.
1 Corinthians 11:1 (KJV)
“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.”
.
Philippians 3:17 (KJV)
“Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.”
.
What this author is talking about is the WAY believers have historically been taught to be followers of Christ.
.
The author is talking about a human hierarchy within the church system – which essentially evolved by what many call the “Romanization” of the church.
.
During Jesus’ ministry he turned to the disciples and said “You see how the Gentiles “Exercise Authority” over each other.
It shall not be so among you – for you are brothers.
.
The “Gentiles” which Jesus was referring too were the Romans.
The Jewish people were subject and under the authority of the Roman Empire.
And the Roman Empire exercised authority by the use of a hierarchy.
.
The hierarchy consisted of:
– The Roman Emperor
– Then below him then Roman Governors (Prefects / Procurators)
– Then under the Governors were the Roman Legions (solders)
– And under them the Roman citizen
.
Each of those exercised authority over the other.
.
For example – in Capernaum Roman Centurion (mid-level officer rank) had a servant whom he asked Jesus to heal
He told Jesus: “I am a man under authority” He was referring to the Roman system of authority.
.
After Pentecost the church began to grow as it was being led by the Apostles.
At that time – Christian meetings were home meetings – and were what we might call “open pulpit” meetings
.
1 Corinthians 14:26
“What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.”
There was no “Clergy” class of believer.
.
There was no Hierarchy among believers.
.
There was however – what Paul called a 5-fold ministry
Ephesians 4:11–12 (KJV)
“And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.
.
The Apostolic ministry could be seen as a FATHER ministry – because the Apostle could function within all 5 of the ministerial functions.
.
The church at that time – was to function as a family.
The early church met in homes (Acts 2:46; Romans 16:5; Philemon 1:2)
.
Church life emphasized fellowship, shared meals, prayer, and teaching (Acts 2:42)
Leaders were elders (presbyters) and servants (deacons), not titles of status
.
Leadership was SERVANT orient (Matthew 23:11; 1 Peter 5:2–3)
.
All members were seen as parts of one body (1 Cor. 12) and a spiritual family (Gal. 6:10; Eph. 2:19)
.
However – in the 2nd to 4th centuries AD the church became institutionalized (some say “Romanized”)
In other words – it took on the system of authority modeled by the Roman empire.
This would obviously be the case with the Roman Catholic church.
.
At this time – we see the rise of the “monoepiscopacy” (single bishop leadership) and an office-based and hierarchical system of authority.
And the church became divided into two populations (the clergy and the laity)
.
Many authors have written about this:
– Watchman Nee – the Normal Christian Church Life
– Frank Viola & George Barna – Pagan Christianity Reimagining Church
– Roland Allen- Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours?
– Leonard Sweet & Alan Hirsch – Missional and Relational church models
.
blessings
br.d
Some Christians have argued online that when a person becomes possessed by a demon or the devil himself , that still even then the person has a certain amount of free will and can choose not to commit a sin , evil action , that they are still accountable to God , accountable before God even if they are possessed by a demon or the devil himself if they commit a sin or evil action , what do we think ?
Plus we have all heard of
Occam’s razor aka the principle of parsimony , how can Occam’s razor apply to our Calvinism debate and debate over other Bible doctrines ,
Interpretations of Scripture – Jeff
br.d
Hello Jeff – I hope this finds you well.
.
The term “Free Will” is more precisely understood as “Freedom” granted to humans.
.
And the concept of “Freedom” granted to humans is radically different within Calvinism.
.
OUTSIDE of Calvinism – there is a type of “Freedom” that is classified as LIBERTARIAN “Freedom”
.
LIBERTARIAN “Freedom” is defined as the ability to DO OTHERWISE
.
Sometimes LIBERTARIAN “Freedom” is refereed to as a “Garden of forked paths”
.
For example:
You drive to a stop sign and the road goes to the left and to the right.
Are both options granted to you?
Do both options exist for you?
.
With LIBERTARIAN “Freedom”
1) You are granted the “Freedom” to go to the left
AND
2) You are also granted “Freedom” to DO OTHERWISE and go to the right.
.
.
The foundational core of Calvinism – is EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) as defined 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)
.
.
You should be able to see – in Calvinism *NOTHING* within creation is granted the “Freedom” to DO OTHERWISE than that which was decreed.
.
So for our example above – in Calvinism – it has already been decreed which direction you will go.
The ability or “Freedom” to DO OTHERWISE does not exist for you.
It does not exist as an event
It does not exist as an option
.
THUS in Calvinism – you are not granted a CHOICE between going to the left and going to the right.
Only *ONE* direction can be granted to you……..the direction that was infallibly decreed.
,
.
FOR EVERY EVENT AND EVERY IMPULSE WITHIN YOUR BRAIN – THE DECREE GRANTS ONLY ONE SINGLE PREDESTINED RENDERED-CERTAIN OPTION
.
And you are not granted a CHOICE in the matter of what that option will be.
And you are not granted the ability to refrain.
.
Since this applies to all of creation – then it applies to demons just as much as it applies to humans.
.
.
So if it is decreed you will Perform SIN_X at TIME_T
Then that decree is infallible and does not grant existence to any ALTERNATIVE
The option for you to NOT Perform SIN_X at TIME_T does not exist
It therefore does not exist for you to choose.
Thus – you are not granted a CHOICE in the matter.
.
.
Occam’s Razor, also known as the principle of parsimony or law of simplicity, is a philosophical and methodological guideline.
.
Among competing explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest one — the one that makes the fewest assumptions — is usually the best.
.
How would this apply to Calvinism?
.
Lets say you Perform SIN_X at TIME_T
The question might be asked why you did that.
.
In Calvinism’s case – the simplest answer is that Performing SIN_X at TIME_T was the only option granted existence by Calvin’s god’s infallible decree.
.
blessings
br.d
br.d
Hi Jeff – you also asked about human accountability.
.
The concept of human accountability is also radically different in Calvinism.
.
WHAT IS THE EUTHYPHRO DILEMMA:
A famous philosophical question known as the Euthyphro dilemma, posed by Socrates in Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro.
.
Is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?
.
THE TWO HORNS OF THE DILEMMA
.
OPTION_A:
If something is good because God commands it, then “goodness” is arbitrary — it depends solely on God’s will.
If God had commanded evil then evil is must be classified as “good” because God commands it.
.
OPTION_B:
If God commands something because it is good, then goodness exists independently of God — meaning that moral truths exist in and of themselves.
.
.
Calvinism always takes OPTION_A as the answer to the dilemma.
.
Calvinist R.C. Sproul
-quote
God ordains evil – and god is good – and he only ordains that which is good.
.
Calvinist John Piper
-quote
God looks at evil through his wide lens – and he sees that it glorifies him – and that gives him pleasure.
.
.
So lets say Calvin’s god decrees you will turn to the left at TIME-T
.
In this case – the infallible decree grants you ONLY ONE SINGLE PREDESTINED RENDERED-CERTAIN OPTION
.
– The ability to DO OTHERWISE does not exist for you.
– Thus the option to DO OTHERWISE does not exist for you to choose
– You did not have a CHOICE between [DO] and [NOT DO] because the option to [NOT DO] did not exist for you to choose.
.
Lets say Calvin’s god holds you accountable for turning left at TIME-T and throws you into the lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
.
Then you are held accountable for what Calvin’s god decreed to infallibly come to pass.
.
.
That is how human accountability works in Calvinism.
.
blessings
br.d
Some More Questions
A person typed online this
October 2025
“Ultimately there are 2 diametrically opposed groups in Christian theology.
The correct understanding 👇
Camp 1
Pretribulation
Rightly dividing
Dispensationalism
OSAS
Or the wrong understanding 👇
Camp 2
Post tribulation
Each verse is talking to YOU
Replacement theology/Amillennialism
Works/loss of salvation
I know there are a FEW people who mix a bit of these together because they have only been taught multiple pieces of theology and make their own Frankenstein’s monster (that doesnt even work together within itself), but as they continue to run into those contradictions in their beliefs, they will either try to find a LITERAL solution (and end up in the first camp), OR choose to be TAUGHT hand me down catholic dogma (yes, even in protestant churches) and “spiritualize” what they will never understand without using the guidelines of the literal approach, and scripture to interpret scripture!
Don’t be in camp 2 folks, it ALL makes PERFECT sense, and there is no need to “Spiritualize” stuff you don’t understand. You just need to back up and remove the preconceived bias against the doctrines in camp 1, and the bible becomes clear!”
Some people typed in reply
“And lately we have Universalism rearing its ugly head for camp 2. So many caught up in it.”
“Maybe we should leave some room for error on our part. And maybe others are not as far from the Truth as we tend to believe.
Let us follow the admonition to speak the Truth in Love.”
“not arguing. People can tell when we are being loving.”
“especially those who were helped by showing them they were in false doctrine, and were set free from the bondage of false “self salvation” and FINALLY understanding the “peace and Joy” Jesus gives 🙂
They seem to understand that is love very much!”
I just hope and pray that when us
Christians Ultimately Pass And go to Heaven and then the New Earth that God gives us All the Perfect True Correct Understanding and Interpretation of All The Countless Bible Doctrines and Theology as only he would Know .
Only God is Infallible !
Other than the Basic Essential Doctrines for the Christian Faith taught in Scripture , most people are Confused and Perplexed , look how they endlessly debate and discuss Bible doctrines online.
Also some Christians have said that certain SINS are clearly Satanic in Origin , they said that while certain SINS are Satanic in Origin and God Hates Those Sins and Condemns them , at the same time God Also uses those same sins to accomplish his Goals, and/or permits those Sins to Happen , as part of God’s
Master Plan , God working in Mysterious Ways , what do we think ?
I still Hope Jesus Returns Soon and Ends All Evil, Suffering and Injustice in the World , once and for All Forever
br.d
Hello Jeff and welcome
.
I only have a few comments concerning what you posted here.
.
1) COMMENT FROM POST:
You just need to back up and remove the preconceived bias against the doctrines in camp 1, and the bible becomes clear!”
.
TRANSLATION:
If you remove all preconceived biases against [INSERT MY PREFERRED DOCTRINES HERE] the bible becomes clear.
.
.
This is an approach to scripture which is very common – and common for example among Calvinists.
.
The thinking process is a form of SELF-CANONIZATION
.
The individual or group has two canons:
1) They hold scripture as canon
2) They hold their own interpretations and preconceived biases etc as canon (unquestionable truth)
.
In my multitude of dialogs with Calvinists over the years – I have sometimes thought these people assume every imagination that comes into their brain is Holy Spirit inspired – which of course is irrational thinking – considering the fact that Calvinists are no less human than anyone else.
.
Never the less – that is the way they can be consistently observed.
And that behavior pattern is probably a defense mechanism of the human ego.
.
.
2) COMMENT FROM POST:
Other than the Basic Essential Doctrines for the Christian Faith taught in Scripture , most people are Confused and Perplexed…..
.
.
A RED-FLAG that you would want to be aware of – is where a person speaks of what scripture TEACHES.
.
Within the realm of Biblical Scholarship – the most highly respected Scholars do not push their own personal doctrinal agenda.
.
The most highly respected Bible Scholars – are respected because they put all of their focus on providing information to people about what the text SAYS – and they let people draw their own conclusions.
.
So when you bump into a person who claims the Bible clearly teaches [INSERT MY PREFERRED DOCTRINE HERE] you are coming face to face with manipulation rather than information.
.
.
3) COMMENT FROM POST:
God Also uses those same sins to accomplish his Goals, and/or permits those Sins to Happen , as part of God’s
Master Plan…..
.
.
Whenever you hear a Calvinist using the terms “permit” or “allow” in regard to their god – you need to be aware – this word simply means CAUSE
.
1) What Calvin’s god CAUSES he permits/allows
2) What Calvin’s god DOES NOT CAUSE he does not permit/allow
.
Permission language – when used by Calvinists is deceptive – because the Calvinist secretly INVERTS the meaning of the word.
.
.
If you don’t understand how words are given INVERTED meanings within Calvinsit statements – you are guaranteed to be misled by those statements – without realizing you are being misled.
.
blessings
br.d
Years ago around 2015 , I asked an
ELCA Lutheran pastor this
Hypothetical Question
“With all the Hideous Suffering in America and Worldwide, would you personally be willing to sacrifice a certain amount of Free Will if it meant you could live an Earthly Life now free from Unbearable Suffering? ”
The pastor replied
“No , because then human life wouldn’t be Precious anymore”
I should have then replied
“Yes, but in Heaven and the New Earth there will be No More Suffering, yet we humans will still have some degree of Free Will and in Heaven and the New Earth Life will still be Precious correct?”
What do we think ?
br.d
Hello Jeff – hope you’re well.
.
I’m not certain what the pastor meant by “Precious”
.
However – I do like the way Dr. Alvin Plantinga answers that question.
.
1) God is a perfect being – but even a perfect being cannot do that which is impossible.
For example – not even a perfect being can make married-bachelors and square-circles.
So then it becomes obvious that even a perfect being cannot do that which is impossible.
.
2) Now God can make it the case that humans will only do “Good” things
He will not grant events in which a human can do something “Evil”
He will only grant impulses within the human brain which are “Good” impulses.
.
3) The consequence of that would be that humans are never granted a CHOICE between “Good” and “Evil”
Because “Evil” does not exist as an option for them to choose
.
CONCLUSION:
A NECESSARY CONDITION for a “CHOICE” is the existence and availability of more than one option.
If God is going to give humans the ability to make CHOICES between “Good” and “Evil” then both of those must existence and be available for humans to choose
.
This is one of the critical weaknesses of Calvinism
An infallible decree never grants more than one single option.
.
For every human event – and every human impulse – the infallible decree never grants more than ONE SINGLE PREDESTINED RENDERED-CERTAIN OPTION
And man is granted NO SAY in the matter of what that option will be
And NO ABILITY to refrain.
.
Therefore – since ALTERNATIVE option(S) do not exist – it follows – humans are not granted a CHOICE in the matter of anything.
They are granted FALSE PERCEPTIONS of ALTERNATIVES – and FALSE PERCEPTIONS of making CHOICES between those ALTERNATIVES
.
.
Now the scripture does say in the New Earth will have no suffering
But that does not necessitate the eradication of humans having the function of CHOICE
.
.
In Heaven – there were angles – some of which fell
The angels who fell – were the angles who CHOOSE to do so.
Obviously – in Heaven – Angels have the function of CHOICE.
The angels who CHOOSE to fall – will definitely suffer.
But they will not suffer in Heaven.
.
.
blessings
br.d
Hope we all have a Happy and Safe
Thanksgiving , this article mentions
“extra-biblical concepts” but I’m thinking
With these “extra-biblical concepts” maybe these concepts are Not Explicitly taught in the Bible, there are portions of the Bible that seem to teach and describe these
extra-biblical concepts, and that those who teach these extra-biblical concepts are sincere for the most part and don’t just take their beliefs out of thin air , out of nowhere. For Example, I’m a Trinitarian , and the actual word “Trinity” doesn’t appear in the Bible anywhere, the Bible clearly teaches this doctrine
I heard a Pastor one time in a sermon talk about the topic of Change , how Change is a constant part of Life and Human Existence, that Life and Human Existence is Not Static , but Dynamic. Yet many people are Afraid of Change , Uncomfortable with Change and live in
FEAR of the Future ,
In this Current Earthly Life , Life has its Ups and Downs, Twists and Turns, Turmoil, the sad reality is for many
Suffering People in America and Worldwide, things Never get Better
Even if things do get ultimately get Better for Some Suffering People, the sad Ugly Truth is that things will always find a way to go wrong again in the Future, like sickness, disease, a natural disaster, becoming a victim of crime, becoming Homeless, etc.
We all Know the 1967 song by the Young Rascals “How can I be Sure” part of the lyrics go
“How can I be sure in a World that’s constantly changing”
For Christians I wonder , since Heaven and the New Earth as discussed in Revelation will Not have Suffering .
Since there is No Suffering in Heaven and the New Earth, will there ever be
Change in Heaven and the New Earth ?
And if so would the Change that occurs in Heaven and the New Earth be of a type that doesn’t include The Ups, Downs, Twists, Turns and Turmoil of this current Earthly Life that fill countless people with FEAR of the Future, FEAR of the Unknown .
Also do NDE’s Near-Death Experiences of Christians offer any insight to the Calvinism debate , are NDE’s reliable ?do other branches of Science seem to Support Calvinism ? I’ll return in a few days with more opinions
br.d
Hello Jeff – and thank you for your well wishes – and the same to you!!
.
Concerning “Extra-Biblical” concepts – these would be concepts which are contradictory to the concepts as understood by the authors of scripture.
.
For example – it is widely theorized today – that the Star of Bethlehem described in the N.T. could have been a conjunction of planets. Multiple astronomical and historical analyses suggest that a series of planetary conjunctions around the time of Jesus’ birth may have provided the celestial phenomenon referenced in the Gospel of Matthew.
.
Although Matthew did not have the concept of planetary conjunctions – and it might have been the case that Matthew thought the sun orbits the earth – and as such had no conception of an earth as a moving planet which travels in space along with a number of other planets.
.
So planetary conjunction would not automatically be considered “Extra-Biblical” even though it was not something the authors of scripture could have conceived.
.
An example of “Extra-Biblical” can be found in the fact that God commanded the children of Israel to utterly tear down the “High Places” and not to embrace the pagan concepts which were entertained by the god’s Moloch and Baal etc.
.
But we know the people of Israel did not obey that command – and they did mix in pagan concepts.
.
This is called Syncretism.
The blending of different religious beliefs, traditions, and practices to form a new religious system or to incorporate elements from one tradition into another – and in the process form a HYBRID theology.
.
That is what is typically meant by “Extra-Biblical”
.
.
An example of an “Extra-Biblical” concept which the NON-Calvinist finds in Calvinism is the concept of EXHAUSTIVE DIVINE DETERMINISM (EDD) which is SYNCHRONIZED into Christian concepts in order to form a HYBRID which is known as Calvinism.
.
.
There are today Augustinian scholars – who are convinced Augustine Synchronized pagan concepts into Christian theology.
.
It is well established within academia today – Augustine was significantly influenced by the doctrines of Plotinus – a Greek teacher who took doctrines of Plato and re-formed them into religious form.
.
Augustine is said to have utilized key Plotinian concepts, such as the idea of the soul’s journey inward to discover God and the notion of a hierarchical structure of reality, to deepen his understanding of Christian theology
.
Dr. Ken Wilson (Augustinian scholar) argues that Augustine integrated Gnostic and Neoplatonic concepts into Christian theology, particularly through his later development of a deterministic view of salvation.
.
Dr. Wilson contends that Augustine, influenced by his pre-Christian exposure to Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, Stoicism, and Manichaeism, ultimately adopted a theology that diverged from the early church’s understanding of free will.
.
Do a google search for “Examining Calvinism: Augustine, Manichaeism and the Good”
.
Here you will find another author – Kam-lun E. Lee – who notes that Augustine’s concept of cosmic order—central to his theology—was a direct response to the Manichaean view of the universe as a mixture of good and evil.
.
The inevitability of personal evil, a concept shared with the Manichaeans, played a crucial role in Augustine’s theological development, leading him to conclude that individual destiny is ultimately determined by God’s sovereign ordering of the cosmos (aka Calvinism’s concept of predestination)
.
.
That is what we mean by “Extra-Biblical”
.
.
PROBLEMS WHICH ARE INTRODUCED BY EXTRA-BIBLICAL CONCEPTS:
.
A major problem which all Calvinists internally struggle with – is found as a critical problem introduced by Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
The doctrine of decrees stipulates NOTHING exists or happens within creation that is NOT decreed.
.
Therefore:
There is no such thing as ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITIES within creation – because they would constitute an ALTERNATIVE of that which has been infallibly decreed – which would falsify Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
CONSEQUENCE:
The Calvinist is forced to live *AS-IF* his doctrine is FALSE in order to retain a sense of human normalcy.
.
Every Calvinist goes about his life:
1) *AS-IF* ALTERNATIVES exist within creation
2) *AS-IF* he was granted a CHOICE between those ALTERNATIVES
3) *AS-IF* that CHOICE was *UP TO* him.
.
All of which are FALSE according to the Calvinist’s doctrine.
.
Consequently – the Calvinist is forced to live *AS-IF* his belief system is FALSE
.
That serves as a RED-FLAG that Calvinism incorporates Extra-Biblical concepts.
.
.
Concerning Change in the new Heaven and the new Earth.
If there is TIME in the new Heaven and the new Earth – then that would logically entail Change.
.
.
Concerning Near-Death experiences – I think these are generally regarded as interesting – and sometimes problematic – but not taken seriously beyond that.
.
.
Warm Holiday thoughts to you and yours Jeff!!
.
blessings
br.d
Good points , but when you said
“Concerning Change in the new Heaven and the new Earth.
If there is TIME in the new Heaven and the new Earth – then that would logically entail Change.”
My point is About Both Heaven and the Final Destination of Saved Christians, the New Earth, since Time will Exist
Change will Exist at Times in
Heaven and the New Earth ,
But Definitely Not like in this
Current Earthly Life where Countless Christians are Suffering ,
Very Afraid of the Future , and of things going wrong in their lives
The things I said
like sickness, disease, a natural disaster, becoming a victim of crime, becoming Homeless, etc.
Many Christians want True Peace, Stability and Happiness , and the realize that they will only get it in Heaven and the New Earth, where they will have Peace of Mind Knowing Nothing will ever go wrong and misfortune would never happen to anyone.
For Example, some Christians have said that they believe Reincarnation is True, or Might be True , while other Christians take the view that even if Reincarnation is True, That They Definitely do Not want to be Reincarnated , that one Life in this uncertain, stressful, sinful, complicated world of Suffering is More than Enough , More than Enough, they take the View that when they ultimately pass away they want to be alive and in Heaven and then the New Earth , But Definitely Not be
Reincarnated , heck no .
They worry if that if Reincarnation is True , will God respect their wishes to Not be Reincarnated ?
br.d
Hi Jeff
.
Very nice to have you deliberating over a topic with me!!!!
.
So concerning the New Heaven and New Earth –
Yes, the Bible says there will be no suffering in the new heaven and new earth.
.
This future reality is described as a complete renewal of creation, free from the effects of sin, death, mourning, crying, and pain.
.
Revelation 21:4 states, “He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away”.
.
This passage emphasizes that the former broken world, marked by suffering, will be forgotten, and the new creation will be characterized by eternal life and peace.
.
THE CRITICAL POINT:
The absence of suffering is tied to the reversal of the curse that began in the Garden of Eden, with all of creation restored to the perfection God originally intended.
.
The reason this is the CRITICAL POINT is because it hinges on God granting the function of “Choice” to humans.
.
In the case of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden – (OUTSIDE of Calvinism) the following exists:
.
1) both – the option to [EAT] as well as the option to [NOT EAT] existed for Adam
.
2) Thus – Adam was granted a CHOICE between ALTERNATIVE option(S)
.
All human suffering and evil – followed from the CHOICE that Adam made.
.
And humans today are also faced with the same ALTERNATIVES option(S)
.
You and I and everyone else – are faced with ALTERNATIVE option(S) to CHOOSE between.
.
This is not the case in Calvinism – because an infallible decree does not grant existence to ALTERNATIVE option(S) within creation.
.
In Calvinism – the very existence of any ALTERNATIVE option would falsify Calvinism’s doctrine of decrees.
.
.
The new heavens and new earth are portrayed as a place where righteousness dwells, and God will dwell with His people in perfect harmony, eliminating the separation caused by sin.
.
.
Now you may recall the Tabernacle in the Wilderness – where God dwelt with his people.
This in the N.T. is considered a TYPE AND SHADOW of things to come.
.
So what God wants for us (and all humans) is to have what he created originally for Adam and Eve – but which they could not keep.
.
Reincarnation – has its roots in the Vedic texts of ancient India, particularly the Upanishads (c. 1100–500 BCE), where the concepts of saṁsāra (the cycle of birth and death) and karma (action and its consequences) are central.
.
Hinduism teaches that the eternal soul (atman) is reborn in different forms based on accumulated karma, with the ultimate goal being liberation (moksha) from this cycle.
.
Those concepts are completely foreign to scripture – and I would question whether persons who adopts those concepts are “professing” themselves to be followers of Jesus – when they really aren’t.
.
.
But what the scripture indicates to us – is the New Heaven and New Earth will be a place in which we will not be following in the footsteps of Adam and Eve – but rather be following in the footsteps of Jesus.
.
As Paul describes – we are TRANSFORMED by love which comes to us by a loving father – and works in us and is worked out through faith and the Holy Spirit.
.
.
It’s going to be wonderful!!! :-]
.
blessings
br.d