Calvinism is a form of systematic theology, and not a cult. For you to take my words out of context, and apply it to Calvinism is both appalling and divisive. Why are you attempting to poison a babe in Christ with your obvious hatred of things in Reformed theology? that is being insensitive to the needs of the poster, it is derailing the OP, it is being rude, and the discussion of Calvinism rightfully belongs on another thread dedicated to the Calvinism/Arminian issue. I did not see that when I looked for it, but I believe that it once was here.
We receive by faith the work that Christ has done for us on the Cross.
If a king gives his riches to a poor man and he receives it, does the poor man go home shouting, "I did it!!!! I earned this fortune by my own power of accepting!!!" That would be absurd now wouldn't it?
It goes even beyond that because the Holy Spirit works through the gospel to create faith in the hearts of those who hear the gospel, this work as I mentioned is not irresistible but makes it so that the whole process is one of grace.
I too would recommend studying this topic, but to do so after one has matured in their faith a bit more and then to consider both views and not just from a Calvinistic source as I did at the onset of my faith journey.
These are difficult questions, and if we aren't careful they will be completely decided by the preconceived views we acquire in our mind.
I have listened to countless teachings from R.C. Sproul from back when I was a Calvinist they lead me to a place of deep confusion almost to the point of losing my faith.
I recommend caution.
When I use the term I don't use it in a manner that I think is derogatory. Calvinists are not followers of John Calvin, it is just an easily recognizable theological distinction for those who hold to reformed soteriology such as yourself.
Would you really recommend a new believer start with those guys?
Scripture of course does say that we have been chosen, but much like the people of Israel we are chosen corporately. And again much like the children of Israel our stance in the Covenant is sustained by faith, obedience to the Covenant and a part so long as we are found in Christ our Covenant Representative.
To say that God chose me and not someone else (who died an unbeliever) for the purposes of his glory is incorrect.
No disagreement here. This is not uniquely Calvinistic.
Don't forget the other side of the coin, if he decides who gets saved he also chooses who doesn't.
Is it perfectly just and good for him to create a being that could not do otherwise, setup the preconditions for his inability and then punish him for that which he had no other choice but to do?
It's like shooting the man who picked up the gun, except he had no choice but to pick it up. In this case he was born.
Technically in Calvinistic theology only those for whom Christ particularly died have the possibility of being saved. It is just from your perspective that "anyone can be saved," as you don't know who the elect are.
He determines it, yet we are supposedly "free" to make choices? More like humans are free to perform actions, but the actions committed are not done so freely as they are determined and ultimately done by God.
Compatibilism (sic) really makes no sense in a Calvinistic framework.
How could it be true that God seeks that none should perish, but he planned and determined that the majority of people would?
I am really not attempting to start a fight, but to quell one, and get back to the OP that the new believer Clover me posted. That is one reason why I made your references to Calvinism in bold red above, it demonstrated that your agenda is not to answer the OP but to create a conflict where there is no reason to do so.
Please take this very mild rebuke as an attempt to have a new Christian understand things without having any unnecessary conflict.
yep that is how I read it.
