Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Christian Calvanism

G

Guest

Guest
Hello to everybody.

Does any christian here believe or hold Calvanistic views?

I have little experience with Calvanism, other than the written works are quite thick ;)

My basic understanding is that Calvanist views show that humans have no freewill, and that god has already chosen the path of each and every person regardless of their actions or love of Jesus. Is this over simplified? (I'm almost positive it is!). Can anyone give me a better understanding?

Thanks!
 
Hi Curious,

Welcome to the board.

I can give you a little outline with a few verses, and some opinion.

1. Total depravity (man's state)

We are basically helpless, and headed for wrath, apart from Christ. This is due to Adam's sin causing sin to enter, and all of creation and men being subject (enslaved) by the fall.


Ephesians 2:1-5

1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)


Conditions of the sinner would be things like...

1. He is dead in trespasses.
2. Is of the world.
3. He is a slave to sin, and does not seek God in his captivity.
4. Separated from God due to sin, and is an object of wrath.
5. unrighteous, and walks in darkness.
6.lacks understanding and wisdom in God's ways.



2. Unconditional Election (the work of the Father)

This is a matter of salvation coming by grace through faith in Christ Jesus our Lord who paid the price for our sin with His own precious perfect blood. This began in eternity past as part of the economy of God. God works through the events, prophecy, prayers, and wills of men to accomplish His will. I would say that no one can be elect and not be called. The elect is he who chooses God, but it is because God called Him. He loves God, but it is because God loved Him. He obeys God, but it is because God has written His law on His heart.

John 12:39-40
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.


1 Peter 2:7-9
7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:


3. Limited Atonement, or a better phrase, Particular Redemption (the work of Jesus Christ)

Christ's blood is of infinite value and is also infinitely sufficent to save all that are lost, and even more, but it is particular to those who will believe...those called, and those who have choosen. All others, unbelievers, will not enter into His rest. Judgement is delayed because of God's love and longsuffering, so that all who are His may come to Him.

2 Peter 3:9
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

The atonement accomplished redemption (bought back), propitiation (wrath turned), reconciliation (oneness, or peace). The atonement is the price...through sacrifice. God loved us so much that in Isaiah 53 it says that "It pleased God to bruise Him." John 13:1 1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.


4. Irresistible Grace or Effacious Grace (the work of the Holy Spirit)

This is the way that God calls, and this is the witness that causes one to believe on the work of Christ Jesus. This is the application of the atonement, by the Holy Spirit through the blood of Jesus Christ. This process of regeneration gives us a new nature that believes, repents, and trusts in Christ.

There are two calls, a general call to all, and a specific internal call...this one is effectual. This is through preaching, teaching, and reading of the Word of God.

2 Peter 1:10
10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:



5. Eternal Security, or Persevering Grace

This is simply saying that the contract, or covenant, is unbreakable. This is only for the true believer...one who has matured unto salvation. Will he sin, yes, but it is not in lawlessness. The good works are also done in Christ, and will remain because of Him. I am not trying to complicate this, but I think the parable of the sower is a good illustration of the fruit-bearing believer being one who has been elected by God to be party to this unbreakable covenant. To sum up, God's persevering grace is extended to perservering saints.


1 Peter 1:3-5
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.


Hebrews 10:14
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

John 10:27-30
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and my Father are one.


Jesus' last statement refers to His eternal covenant with the Father, I believe...their oneness in the Father's plan.

The order, I believe, is foreknowledge, predestination, effectual calling, regenetation, repentance and faith, justification, adoption, sanctification, and glorification.

I would say that this little outline is the basics of Calvinism with a few of my own opinions put in. Calvinism is misunderstood a great deal, I think. By both calvinists and non-calvinists alike. The Lord bless you.
 
reply

Curious, If I were you I wouldn't be bothered by what Calvinism is or not. You see, John Calvin can't save or any human for that matter. There is only one way to get into heaven, and that way is through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Salvation should be simple as pie. Please don't complicate it by listening to all the world's to all the world's solutions to have eternal life. Listen to the one who can save you, and He is Jesus Christ. He loved you so much that He died on a cross for the forgiveness of your sins and others. But the choice is yours to make. Think about it, do you really want to go to hell because you are afraid to make a decision. You could even die tomorrow, without making Jesus Christ your Lord and Savior. Are you ready to make that decision now? If so, say the following prayer with me.

Dear Heavenly Father, I come to You in the name of Jesus. Your Word says, him that cometh to Me, I will in no way cast out, but you take me in and I thank You for it. Your Word says, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. I am calling on Your name, so I know You have saved me now.

You also said, if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. I believe in my heart Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I believe that He was raised from the dead for my justification, and I confess Him now as my Lord, and I do believe with my heart, I have become the righteousness of God in Christ, AND FINALLY I AM SAVED!!!! Thank You Lord.



May God bless, Golfjack
 
lovely said:
Hi Curious,

Welcome to the board.

I can give you a little outline with a few verses, and some opinion.

Thank you lovely. That is quite a bit of information to swallow, and I appreciate you taking the time. I need some time to think about it and i'm sure i'll have a few questions for you. Thanks again!
 
golfjack said:
Curious, If I were you I wouldn't be bothered by what Calvinism is or not.

golfjack said:
Salvation should be simple as pie. Please don't complicate it by listening to all the world's to all the world's solutions to have eternal life. Listen to the one who can save you, and He is Jesus Christ.

Thank you for your reply, golfjack.

I'm not bothered by any particular belief. My purpose is to learn. I hear where you are coming from, but I do not share your view.

Don't you agree knowledge is power? Why is it good not to know about the beliefs of others, or the state of the world? Lack of knowledge has caused more strife than it is good for. You do not have to change your opinion, just by hearing the beliefs of the rest of the world. You are stronger for it.

golfjack said:
You could even die tomorrow, without making Jesus Christ your Lord and Savior. Are you ready to make that decision now?

That I could. Wouldn't I feel silly if the buhddists got it right and I woke up as a slug? ;-)
 
Fruits of Calvinism

The greatest and most fruitful missionaries - Paton, Carey, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.

The greatest and most fruitful Puritan writers - Owen, Watson, Bunyan, Boston, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.

The greatest and most fruitful evangelists and preachers - Whitfield, Spurgeon, Edwards, Newton, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.

As a general rule the Armenian point of view have had the fruit as the above. This can be verified by historical fact.

God bless
 
Hi CuriousAgnostic, welcome to the board.

Regarding Calvinism you have got plenty to chew on from the posts above, so I will digress from the topic and ask you a favor.

IMO, agnostics tend to be less biased than atheists and theists having that they don't hold on to neither of the 'belief systems' of atheism and theism. Can you please (if time and interest permit you) take a look at this thread "What do you think?", which is a discussion going on about hell and eternal destiny of mankind and see which side of debate has made a sound argument? Just a thought. It is a very long read, so I wouldn't mind if you decide to pass on it. Not that your vote is going to be the deciding factor regarding the truth of the matter but I would like a third persons point of view.
 
I will bemusedly describe myself as a zero-point Calvinist - I believe that all 5 doctrinal elements of the TULIP acronym are false - at least the versions that have been presented to me by some on this forum. So if any of you Calvinists out there think I am misrepresenting Calvinism, please set me straight.

Now to clarify, here is the message that I get most often re the content of the 5 doctrines:

Total Depravity: Humans have no goodness in them whatsoever before becoming members of the kingdom of God.

Uconditional Election: The members of the "elect" (see next point) are selected by God without no account at all taken of their personal characteristics.

Limited Atonement: Eons ago, God selected a specific set of people to be granted entry into the Kingdom. Those not in this set cannot possibly be saved.

Irresistable Grace: The members of the elect cannot resist entry into the Kingdom. Even if they try to fight God, they will ultimately be saved.

Perserverence of the Saints: Once a member of the elect is "in the Kingdom", they cannot fall away and be lost.

I think all these doctrines are false. As stated, though, these do not necessarily reflect "true" Calvinism.
 
TanNintey said:
IMO, agnostics tend to be less biased than atheists and theists having that they don't hold on to neither of the 'belief systems' of atheism and theism. Can you please (if time and interest permit you) take a look at this thread "What do you think?",

Thank you for the welcome Tan.

First off, I do think that the majority of atheists tend not to be biased in any way. I regard atheism as a "default" position, in that they do not believe in, or have faith in, any sort of supernatural claim. After all, the various flavours of theism have no quantitative or empiracle evidene backing them up, and the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. Also, thinking about it further, are not all children atheists at birth? A child will not know of any religious belief until taught by their parents, whether that be christianity, islam, taoism, or other.

That being said, there are some of what I call "fundamental" atheists who cannot differentiate between cannot prove, cannot NOT prove and the "default" position. These guys seem to almost be angry at god(s), which is moot; why should you be angry at something you believe not to exist?

To round it off, an atheist might say to a theist "There are lot's of gods I don't believe in. Do we not share this view? I just also do not believe in the single god that you believe in".

Thank you for pointing me towards that thread. I will be pleased to have a read, time permitting, and leave my opinion, should I form one.
 
Drew said:
I will bemusedly describe myself as a zero-point Calvinist - I believe that all 5 doctrinal elements of the TULIP acronym are false - at least the versions that have been presented to me by some on this forum. So if any of you Calvinists out there think I am misrepresenting Calvinism, please set me straight.

Hello Drew

Looking at this TULIP acronym, I might draw a conclusion that it seems to be self defeating.

It seems to me that to just about every christian, the purpose is life is to determine the fate in the afterlife, or better put, you "live to die". If this TULIP is correct, then god has already predetermined your fate before you were even created, and further, not everybody created by god will be welcome to god's kingdom. This being said, then what is the point of the earthly plane, or for that matter, christian worship? Wouldn't that be moot? If that is true then why did god create the earthly plane anyways? Was it a make work exercise? Was he bored?

Is that not the point of TULIP? Please set me straight.
 
CuriousAgnostic wrote:
I regard atheism as a "default" position, in that they do not believe in, or have faith in, any sort of supernatural claim.
I disagree. Atheism is a position/belief/faith, even though it does not make an outright claim to the supernatural. Agnosticism (not knowing / not even having a position) is closer to a 'default'. That said, most atheists do actually make a supernatural claim; it is intrinsic to their thinking. The concept and reliance on simple 'reason' is a faith. You can neither prove nor disprove 'reason', it just is. When you affirm 'reason', you will find that atheism is actually illogical. It affirms a 'negative' in the 'absolute'. Agnosticism is a reasonable position to be in. Further, if you believe 'reason' is the way to think, you already have a faith in the supernatural.

CuriousAgnostic, do you affirm 'reason'?
 
Hi Veritas

Veritas said:
I disagree. Atheism is a position/belief/faith, even though it does not make an outright claim to the supernatural. Agnosticism (claiming not to know anything) is closer to a default position.

You make an interesting point. As such, your view seems to be that of a Christian, and I would assume your beliefs are such. I am in the right place for that, after all ;).

"Reason" changes depending on what side of the proverbial pond you are.

Dictionary.com defines "reasonable" with two statements applicable to this discussion:
1.agreeable to reason or sound judgment; logical: a reasonable choice for chairman.
5.capable of rational behavior, decision, etc.

It would seem the very defintion of reason or reasonable is a subjective one. To you, the bible is the word of god, to a muslim, the koran is. To an atheist, there is no quantifiable proof that these two texts, for example, are any more than ancient goatherders fairy tales. This is why theologists of various faiths waste their time when using the verses of their own book on other types of theologists or atheists, the texts don't hold water to the other person, they are not "reasonable".

Veritas said:
CuriousAgnostic, do you affirm 'reason'?

I don't know how to answer that question, based on your view of reason. As a "fence sitter", what I consider reasonable is in question. If i'm to do any soul searching, perhaps I should start with this reason you bring up.

Veritas said:
If you affirm 'reason', you will find that atheism is actually illogical. It affirms a 'negative' in the 'absolute'.

Atheims is simply, a lack of belief in god(s). That is all, very simply put.

Further to that, there is as defined "weak" atheism and "strong" atheism. Weak atheists adhere to a more agnostic like defination, where they simply do not believe in god(s) for lack of empiricle proof. The belief in god(s) is a faith based practise, and a weak atheist cannot adhere to belief where no hard proof exists. I do not find this illogical in the least. This practise leaves open room for a truth, as long as the truth comes with absolute proof.

Strong atheism is a statment of absolute. A strong atheist will tell you that there is NO god(s) whatsoever. Even though the onus of proof is on the person(s) making the claim, a faith based claim cannot be disproven either. Therefore, a strong atheist has the onus to disprove the claim, making their statement of the absolute illogical. This type of thinking is a belief, yes, and does not leave room for a truth in light of absolute proof.

Do you agree? Am I out in left field still?
 
CuriousAgnostic said:
Hello Drew

Looking at this TULIP acronym, I might draw a conclusion that it seems to be self defeating.

It seems to me that to just about every christian, the purpose is life is to determine the fate in the afterlife, or better put, you "live to die". If this TULIP is correct, then god has already predetermined your fate before you were even created, and further, not everybody created by god will be welcome to god's kingdom. This being said, then what is the point of the earthly plane, or for that matter, christian worship? Wouldn't that be moot? If that is true then why did god create the earthly plane anyways? Was it a make work exercise? Was he bored?

Is that not the point of TULIP? Please set me straight.
If you excuse the use of a "church-y" expression:

My friend, you are preaching to the choir.

I cannot make sense of why God would create the particular TULIP system that I have described. And I see no support for it in the Scriptures anyway. As always, some may take issue with my representation of TULIP. Prithee, correct me.
 
Drew said:
1. Total Depravity: Humans have no goodness in them whatsoever before becoming members of the kingdom of God.

2. Uconditional Election: The members of the "elect" (see next point) are selected by God without no account at all taken of their personal characteristics.

3. Limited Atonement: Eons ago, God selected a specific set of people to be granted entry into the Kingdom. Those not in this set cannot possibly be saved.

4. Irresistable Grace: The members of the elect cannot resist entry into the Kingdom. Even if they try to fight God, they will ultimately be saved.

5. Perserverence of the Saints: Once a member of the elect is "in the Kingdom", they cannot fall away and be lost.
1. Psa 39:5 Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee: verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity. Selah.
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
2 Cor 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
How can a dead man chose God?

2. Exactly - IF God chose based upon your goodness then you'd be the author of your salvation and deserve some of the glory.

3. God does what he pleases - Can God do wrong?
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

4. And what is so bad about this?
John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him:
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

5. If they could fall away then it would show that they were not in Christ in the first place and that they were counting on something they did or would not do for salvation. How do you explain:
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
Phil 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Now - while we are at this would you mind commenting on:
"The greatest and most fruitful missionaries - Paton, Carey, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.
The greatest and most fruitful Puritan writers or any Christian writers - Owen, Watson, Bunyan, Boston, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.
The greatest and most fruitful evangelists and preachers - Whitfield, Spurgeon, Edwards, Newton, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology."

I understand this short post will not convince or was very thorough but I felt led to post anyway.

God bless
 
Good to talk to you CuriousAgnostic,
And you are right about my belief. For me to live is Christ. And I do agree with you that both weak atheism and agnosticism do not expressly violate reason and logic, although I believe adherents to both can. And yes, I agree both leave open room for truth.

I'm going off your original topic a bit here and I hope you don't mind...

"Reason" changes depending on what side of the proverbial pond you are.......To you, the bible is the word of god, to a muslim, the koran is. To an atheist, there is no quantifiable proof that these two texts, for example, are any more than ancient goatherders fairy tales.

I'm speaking of a 'reason' more basic than that. I'm speaking of the 'reason' that you are using right now to understand the words I'm typing.

It would seem the very defintion of reason or reasonable is a subjective one....I don't know how to answer that question, based on your view of reason. As a "fence sitter", what I consider reasonable is in question. If i'm to do any soul searching, perhaps I should start with this reason you bring up.

How subjective? Do you understand what I am typing? Can you tell the difference when I reply in a reasonable or unreasonable way? I would assume you would like me to reply to you reasonably. There are basic laws that you assume (on faith) to understand me. One of them can simply be expressed like this: (A DOES NOT= B). If you can accept this, then you've accepted there is such a thing as truth. Can we agree on that? :)
 
*EDIT: I just saw that Veritas and CuriousAgnostic kind of hashed these points already. So this post might be repetitive*

CuriousAtheist said:
First off, I do think that the majority of atheists tend not to be biased in any way. I regard atheism as a "default" position, in that they do not believe in, or have faith in, any sort of supernatural claim.
I was an atheist for most part of my life (about 15 years; am 27 now). Throwing that out there, just so you know I am not making uninformed claims about atheism like most theists do. I was a strong atheist. Atheism at the end of the day is not a ‘non-belief’ system as most would want you to believe but is as much a belief system as any theism.

The bias I speak of is evident when you look at the proof that an atheist requires of deity. Mostly, scientifically verifiable proof. Thus, actively rejecting any subjective personal proof of an individual regarding deity. Its like handing you a tape measure and asking you to tell me what time of day it is. That is what atheists do. Hand science as a tool to the theist and ask the theist to prove deity.

Where does that leave us? It leaves us where an atheist has to make a claim, “I believe there is no God†without sufficient proof to back it up. Right now I can see a flag going off in your head, “Wait! The burden of proof is on the theistâ€Â. Yes, but the catch 22 here is that an atheist is not willing to consider the subjective personal experience proof of the theist and limiting this evidence according to his bias. So an atheist is not making a statement of non-belief, “I do not believe there is a Godâ€Â. That is a cop out. I cannot say, “I do not believe CuriousAgnostic is not sincere†without it meaning “I believe CuriosAgnostic is sincereâ€Â. So an atheist is left making this claim “I believe there is no God†while rejecting the proof of the theist and yet not producing his own proof of non existence of God. That is the core statement of true atheism. Any ism which carries a core statement is a belief system.

After all, the various flavours of theism have no quantitative or empiracle evidene backing them up
See what I mean. Limiting the evidence to empirical only. It is not an objective truth that empirical evidence is the only valid evidence in this universe. You do not use the hubble-telescope to view micro-organisms. Similarly you cannot use science/empiricism to measure deity, so science/empiricism cannot be used to disprove deity.

Also, thinking about it further, are not all children atheists at birth?
Nope. I haven’t seen any new born come into this world making a statement “I believe there is no Godâ€Â.

A child will not know of any religious belief until taught by their parents, whether that be christianity, islam, taoism, or other.
Yup. That would make any new born and child an agnostic. They do not know if a God exists or doesn’t exist. Their personal experiences (let them be from their surroundings/society/culture/knowledge) teach them to then adhere to theism or atheism. Theism, to actively acknowledge the existence of God and Atheism, to actively acknowledge the non-existence of God. Neither ‘ism’ has the sufficient objective proof to conclusively state the truth in their position. Hence neither of them is a “default†system but an active belief system.

You being agnostic have chosen the right path. Neither do you deny or accept the claims of deity or lack there of. Only then are you being able to be honest in your ‘curious’ search.
 
CA said:
Atheims is simply, a lack of belief in god(s). That is all, very simply put.

That is a cop out of not defining atheism completely. Let’s say I tell a child, “I lack the belief that you are cuteâ€Â. No matter how sugar coated it might sound it is still making a positive statement of belief in the negative i.e., “I believe that you are not cute†thus hurting the kids feelings. The lack of belief at its very core drives the atheist to make a positive statement of belief that “I believe there are no god(s)â€Â. That then let it be weak or strong makes atheism a belief system just as much as theism.
 
Since the topic of irresistable grace has been introduced, I will re-post a modified version of something I posted in past. This material challenges the notion that the John 6 "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me" text supports irresistable grace:

We start with the text of Jonh 6:37-40 as rendered in the NASB:

37. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.

38. "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.

39"This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.

40"For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

What exactly does “all that†in v37 and v. 39 refer to?

Calvinists will identify the "all that" in verses 37 and 39 as "those whom, in his great love, he elected long ago to save, and cannot help but be drawn into the Kingdom." We shall see that this is not the only possible conclusion when we consider the possible meanings of the "all that" found in verse 39 in light of the the content of verse 40, taking into account some significant structural similarities between v 39 and v. 40.

Note the parallel structure of verses 39 and 40 – they each have 3 clauses that map almost perfectly from one verse to the other. They both have the same A-B-C structure.

First, we should note the connective word "for" in verse 40. This establishes a logical connection between these two verses, suggesting an act of clarification on Jesus’ behalf. The "all that" in verse 39 whom the Father "has given" to Jesus is none other than "everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him" as per verse 40. You can probably see where I am going.

If we allow verse 40 to be used as a clarifying referent to disambiguate the "all that" in verse 39, the 2 verses taken together can be seen to be consistent with a reading that "all who freely come to believe in Jesus" are given to the Son by the Father. The people that are "given" are given in their state of already having freely (without an irresistable "tug") accepted Jesus' offer of salvation.

This text does not support an "irresistable grace" reading to the exclusion of other interpretations."
 
Drew said:
Since the topic of irresistable grace has been introduced, I will re-post a modified version of something I posted in past. This material challenges the notion that the John 6 "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me" text supports irresistable grace:
Drew - you have t o explain how a spiritually dead man can come to Christ on his own:

Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins:
1 Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

Now - when you can show me otherwise I'll listen.

Still waiting for you to respond to:
"The greatest and most fruitful missionaries - Paton, Carey, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.
The greatest and most fruitful Puritan writers or any Christian writers - Owen, Watson, Bunyan, Boston, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology.
The greatest and most fruitful evangelists and preachers - Whitfield, Spurgeon, Edwards, Newton, etc. were Calvinistic in their theology."

Either God saves or man's choice saves.

God bless
 
Back
Top