Is Calvinism of the Bible?

[Vic C.]

With the amount of reminders and warnings that have been given out in this Forum, why do we continue with the insults and name calling? One member can't post here for a while and one is right behind them.

Lets keep it mature and civil, please.

 

[Devekut]

What I do not understand about Calvinism is why it percieves "co-operative" grace as such a threat to God's sovereignty.

Saying that man has to co-operate in his salvation in order to be saved does not mean that salvation comes from men. In fact, what monogerists teach is that God desires to save us through our own co-operation, through the excercise of our own free-will. This co-operation is the foundation of our relationship with God.

If God did not desire our co-operation with him, then he could save us all by a mere thought. If Calvisnism were true, its perplexing as to why he does not do this. This is the reason salvation is such a lengthy process, not because God is slow, but because man is slow recieving it.

 

[GraceBwithU]

John Calvin was an attorney before he was a reformist. His theology followed a humanistic interpretation.

:D

From my extensive discussions with Calvinists, that is about the worse thing you can say to them!

Regards

Francisdesales, please dont boast of your extensive discussions with Calvinists as though you know something.
You seem only to be displaying ignorance in your posts. Do you have any idea of the etymology of the word "humanism?" To confuse 15th or 16th century classical humanism with the modern anti-God philosophical humanism would only make most Calvinists laugh.

Calvin was maybe not the most well known classical humanist, but he was a humanist. He had a classical education in latin and greek, and was opposed to the philosophy of scholasticism. But so were many Catholics. Did you ever read of the humanism of Desiderius Erasmus? Many within the walls of the Vatican were humanists. This does not mean they were anti-God.

Can I make a suggestion that you read up on the term "humanism." Try searching Wiki on Humanism.

Humanism is the name given to the intellectual, literary, and scientific movement of the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries, a movement which aimed at basing every branch of learning on the literature and culture of classical antiquity.

Humanism clearly rejects deference to supernatural beliefs in resolving human affairs but not necessarily the beliefs themselves; indeed some strains of Humanism are compatible with some religions. It is generally compatible with atheism and agnosticism but doesn't require either of these. (Wikipedia)

 

[Veritas]

What I do not understand about Calvinism is why it percieves "co-operative" grace as such a threat to God's sovereignty.

Saying that man has to co-operate in his salvation in order to be saved does not mean that salvation comes from men. In fact, what monogerists teach is that God desires to save us through our own co-operation, through the excercise of our own free-will. This co-operation is the foundation of our relationship with God.

If God did not desire our co-operation with him, then he could save us all by a mere thought. If Calvisnism were true, its perplexing as to why he does not do this. This is the reason salvation is such a lengthy process, not because God is slow, but because man is slow recieving it.

Hmm... I suppose I have a slightly different view. I agree that God's sovereignty is not threatened by us having free-will. I just think of all the sacrifices God has made on our behalf (becoming a human, a baby no less, subjecating Himself to violation and shame and ultimately a horrible death) I would expect if He wishes, He can willingly sacrifice part of His sovereignty on behalf of building a real relationship with us. And it almost seems by doing this willingly, God really isn't sacrificing sovereignty anyways, rather heightening it.

I am one who believes it is faith alone that saves us and that it is purely a gift from God. I think our salvation is easy because of that (Too easy really, and we constantly make it difficult on ourselves). However, we can resist, and say no I don't want you God. And therein lies our freewill.

So I would say that we are saved entirely by God's grace.
I also believe God wishes to save all and does everything in His power and love to do so. So those who refuse God, are guilty entirely in that.

 

[francisdesales]

Again you show your ignorance of Calvinism. Yes, Calvinists believe that man is totally depraved. This does not mean man has no ability to choose right from wrong. I think you guys sit around making stuff up.

Which Calvinist says that man has the ability to choose right from wrong??? How is one TOTALLY depraved, and yet able to choose right from wrong??? Being totally depraved means that man CANNOT choose right. If man was able to choose good, he would NOT be TOTALLY depraved. Is that clear enough? And I am ignornant about terms???

"We are beasts, ridden by God or by the devil", according to the inventor of total depravity, Luther. Did Calvin decide that man could choose right when that man was eternally predestined for hell even before he was born? Do you really know what Calvinists believe? It doesn't appear so.

Finally, a term which is actually used in theology today. I am surprised. Yes, Calvinists deny syergism. We claim to be monergists. Salvation is wholy the work of God for man, and not the work of man for God. That is monergism. Synergism is the Catholic doctrine. Why francisdesales, that was a pleasent surprise.

Synergism is the Bible's view, Mondar. But Calvinists won't have it. I have posted some 3000 posts on other sites with CALVINISTS and I have argued this over and over, among many other issues. They refuse to see that the Greek word for synergy is in the Bible, both OT and NT, applied to the relationship between God and man. It is there "sacred cow" which they refuse to give up for the sake of better understanding God's word, just as you refuse to give up sola scriptura.

Is synergism a Catholic doctrine? Of course, and biblical as well, just as all Catholic doctrines are based on the Bible. Both East and West have consistently believed it - until Luther's total depravity separated the relationship between God and man and making it a legal transaction ONLY. Trust me, I've been down that road. And despite your obvious dislike of me, it would be better not to judge what I know about Calvinism based on one comment about humanism. Clearly, they do NOT consider themselves "humanists". They would laugh at you if you thought they were and consider it an insult. Thus, my comment.

Regards

 

[unred typo]

quote by mondar:

Francisdesales, please dont boast of your extensive discussions with Calvinists as though you know something.
You seem only to be displaying ignorance in your posts. Do you have any idea of the etymology of the word "humanism?" To confuse 15th or 16th century classical humanism with the modern anti-God philosophical humanism would only make most Calvinists laugh." (end quote)

Francisdesales is not ignorant of what Calvinists believe. He knows more than ‘something’ and if there is any ignorance to be pointed out, it is not something that Calvinists can laugh about. As usual your condescending posts are more history and vocab lessons than dealing with the OP. We are getting an education in obscure and archaic words, though. :-D Thanks, Mondar.

Unred, I have often and honestly wondered why you bother writing some of the things you do. In the last post I complained that Francisdesales does not seem to know the difference between 16th Century humanism and modern humanism. You come in with sarcasm making statements not even related to the issue (the humanism of John Calvin). I have often noticed that when I post, you seem to race others to argue sarcasticly with "the Calvinist." To what purpose is this behavior? You actually believe your behavior "Godly?

Please go back and reread the previous posts. Try to notice that the essence of my complaint related to humanism and not Calvinism in general.

Thank you for your kind correction. I shall attempt to emulate your gentle and godly manner in the future.
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30265&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=150

 

[mondar]

Which Calvinist says that man has the ability to choose right from wrong??? How is one TOTALLY depraved, and yet able to choose right from wrong???

This is basic simple theology. It is always a gasser when non-Calvinists demand to say what Calvinists believe. Francisdesales, you do this all the time. Your make believe Calvinist is interesting, but non-existent. Tell me how many books written by Reformed scholars have you read? I am guessing none. Name the title and author of one Reformed book you have read. You know a few who might claim to be Calvinists on these bbs, nothing more. Then from your extremely limited knowledge of Calvinism you begin to pontificate on what Calvinists believe. Come on, don't be so hypocritical and arrogant. You even argue with me (a Calvinist) one what Calvinists believe. That is commonly called a straw man. It is simple honesty to read Calvinists for what they are saying rather then making them say something you want.

Why do Calvinists say that mankind knows right from wrong? The most heathen mother loves her children. Why does this heathen mother love her children? Why does she do what is right? Because the work of the law is written on the hearts of the heathen (not the new covenant), their consciences bearing witnesses. In fact from the time of Adam (The tree of the knowledge of good and evil) man has had a knowledge of right and wrong. Of course in Adams act, when he partook of the tree, mankind learned right and wrong from the perspective of wrong. In Adam we all knew sin and rebellion. So then, knowledge of right and wrong does not protect one from sin. In fact Romans 7 speaks of how knowledge of right and wrong ("the commandment") is often opportunity for sin to revive.

Total depravity speaks of mans inability to please God. MAN IN THE FLESH CANNOT PLEASE GOD. Total depravity speaks of what man will do with that knowledge of right and wrong. We will use it to rebel. Total depravity does not mean that man is as sinful as he could be, but rather that sin permeates every part of mans being. Man knows the difference between right and wrong, but by nature, man practices the wrong.

Being totally depraved means that man CANNOT choose right. If man was able to choose good, he would NOT be TOTALLY depraved. Is that clear enough? And I am ignornant about terms???

Definitely you are ignorant of the terms being used.

"We are beasts, ridden by God or by the devil", according to the inventor of total depravity, Luther. Did Calvin decide that man could choose right when that man was eternally predestined for hell even before he was born? Do you really know what Calvinists believe? It doesn't appear so.

Interesting quote. Where is it from? I would guess it is from Luthers "Bondage of the Will. I would be shocked if you have read "Bondage of the Will." My guess is your read some Catholic person who quoted some other Catholic person who misquoted Luther.

Do I know what Calvinists believe? Well, I perceive that I am far ahead of you in knowledge of what Calvinist believe. But that is not saying much, as you have very little knowledge yourself of what Calvinists believe. I yet have much to learn, but stand head and shoulders above you in knowledge of what Calvinists believe. If you doubt that, would you like to move the discussion to a Reformed Presbyterian board. Barnzilla is one such board. Let then judge the matter. Of course I know you will not do this. Generally, today, the term Calvinist is defined by the Synod of Dort. While this narrow view of Calvinism may not be specifically what Calvin taught, and may be colored by the later Puritans, out of it came what is called "the 5 points of Calvin." The moniker "Calvinist" today generally applies not to those who follow the teachings of Calvin, but those who accept the Synod of Dort.

Finally, a term which is actually used in theology today. I am surprised. Yes, Calvinists deny syergism. We claim to be monergists. Salvation is wholy the work of God for man, and not the work of man for God. That is monergism. Synergism is the Catholic doctrine. Why francisdesales, that was a pleasent surprise.

Synergism is the Bible's view, Mondar. But Calvinists won't have it. I have posted some 3000 posts on other sites with CALVINISTS and I have argued this over and over, among many other issues.

You posted 3000 posts on Calvinist boards? What boards might this be? I would really like to see some of your work with true Calvinists. I would also like to see what boards you call "Calvinist." Francisdesales, I must admit, from what I have seen of you on this board, I think your blowing hot air about posting 3k posts on Calvinist boards. But I am also very curious. Whee are these posts on a Calvinst board?

They refuse to see that the Greek word for synergy is in the Bible, both OT and NT, applied to the relationship between God and man. It is there "sacred cow" which they refuse to give up for the sake of better understanding God's word, just as you refuse to give up sola scriptura.

LOL, oh please tell me more about this claim. Actually, its not funny. Your claim is so very dishonest on several levels. Nevertheless, First (1), can you tell me what greek word is the word for "synergy." Then (2) please tell me what context this greek word is used in. Finally (3), can you show me that the context demonstrates that this term speaks of the cooperation of man and God in mans salvation.

Now my guess is first of all you have no training in Greek (not that I am that well versed in greek). Second, you will pick a word like "sunerchomai," or "sunergeo," and think just because the word exists, you do not need to show from the context that it relates to mans cooperation with God in his own salvation. Yes, man, after he is saved, cooperates with God in accomplishing certan works. This is after God regenerates the nature of man, and man receives the new nature, then man cooperates in works. There is no reference where the greek term "sunergeo" etc. is used of man cooperating with God in mans salvation.

Is synergism a Catholic doctrine?

LOL, I gotta love this. Now this might escape the notice of many non-Catholics. But I will be over-joyed to grant you that synergism is a Catholic doctrine. Of course this makes this Board a Catholic board. Many of the moderators on this Board are synergists. That would make this a Catholic Board, right?

Of course, and biblical as well, just as all Catholic doctrines are based on the Bible.

Cough... Cough, bodily asumption of Mary, Cough ...Cough..... Purgatory.... cough cough. Wew, I got choking there for a while. Excuse me.

Both East and West have consistently believed it - until Luther's total depravity separated the relationship between God and man and making it a legal transaction ONLY. Trust me, I've been down that road. And despite your obvious dislike of me, it would be better not to judge what I know about Calvinism based on one comment about humanism. Clearly, they do NOT consider themselves "humanists". They would laugh at you if you thought they were and consider it an insult. Thus, my comment. Regards

The humor of these Boards is amazing. Many synergists will read this thread and completely miss your point that to be a synergist you must deny total depravity. The average protestant synergist also believes in total depravity.

Beyond this, (I am not sure) but I think the council of trent did not condemn a concept of total depravity. I suspect that your manic thinking that no protestants can possibly think any thought that is correct is coming in to play here. The council of trent condemned the Pelagianism. Then it took a position that there is a "provenient grace (spelling?)." But that is a long story in the history of theology.

I have noticed Romanists blaming Luther for more then he should get credit for. I dont think Luther began the term "total depravity" (I am not sure). I dont recall, but I suspect Luther would have used the term "original sin" after Augustine.

Of course Rome messed up when they excommunicated Luther. Rome has recently admitted this when the rescind the papal bull excommunicating Luther. So now, Luther is again a good Catholic. Heh.

 

[GraceBwithU]

Hi Mondar,

"Total Depravity:
Sin has affected all parts of man. The heart, emotions, will, mind, and body are all affected by sin. We are completely sinful. We are not as sinful as we could be, but we are completely affected by sin.
The doctrine of Total Depravity is derived from scriptures that reveal human character: Man’s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick (Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3). The Calvinist asks the question, "In light of the scriptures that declare man’s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God?" The answer is, "He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."
Calvinism also maintains that because of our fallen nature we are born again not by our own will but God’s will (John 1:12-13); God grants that we believe (Phil. 1:29); faith is the work of God (John 6:28-29); God appoints people to believe (Acts 13:48); and God predestines (Eph. 1:1-11; Rom. 8:29; 9:9-23)." (calvinistcorner.com)

This came from a Calvinist website. I have highlighted in blue the parts I would like to comment on.

"We are not as sinful as we could be" To have the total pie there can not be even a crumb missing. However, I still see the point. As a matter of fact the scripture does speak plainly of mans sinful nature. I think most Christians agree on that. Also I would have to agree that because of this depravity that man is unlikely to choose God on his own. What I disagree with is the assumption that Calvin made that it must then be predestined. The scriptures above say nothing of this. This part is all an assumption by John Calvin.

I believe that it all starts by outwardly hearing the gospel preached to you. Then the Holy Spirit calls you inwardly. What is predestined by God is the gospel will be preached to all men before the end.

Matt 24:14
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Some will listen and accept it and some will not.

I can agree easily with everything the paragraphs above say except for “Therefore God MUST predestine.†Because there is nothing in the scriptures given that would lead one to only this conclusion. From these scriptures one might begin to ask , how then does he ever feel the need for God? That of course comes from the Holy Spirit. It is predestined that the gospel will be preached to all.

There is a part of the election that I do feel is predestined. And that is the election of the people called for a very special purpose, (the disciples, Abraham, david, Jacob, writters of the books of the Bible, etc.) These people were predestined so the foundation of the church would be laid and the gospel would be given to the rest of us.
:D

 

[francisdesales]

Blah, blah, blah...

As I said before, Calvinists are like nailing jello to a tree. Their theology conveniently changes all the time.

"We are not understood"...

Maybe you should get together and figure out what you actually believe, rather than re-defining it all the time.

Thanks, but no thanks. I have no desire whatsoever to discuss these issues, especially with someone who uses the tactics that you use when discussing issues with someon who disagrees with your understanding of things. You can remain in your double-speak world, I have no desire to speak about the inconsistencies of Calvinsim.

I could care less what you think I know, so you can drop the name-calling. It is not giving me the impression that your theology is making you holy.

 

[francisdesales]

Hi Mondar,

"Total Depravity:
Sin has affected all parts of man. The heart, emotions, will, mind, and body are all affected by sin. We are completely sinful. We are not as sinful as we could be, but we are completely affected by sin.
The doctrine of Total Depravity is derived from scriptures that reveal human character: Man’s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick (Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3). The Calvinist asks the question, "In light of the scriptures that declare man’s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God?" The answer is, "He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."
Calvinism also maintains that because of our fallen nature we are born again not by our own will but God’s will (John 1:12-13); God grants that we believe (Phil. 1:29); faith is the work of God (John 6:28-29); God appoints people to believe (Acts 13:48); and God predestines (Eph. 1:1-11; Rom. 8:29; 9:9-23)." (calvinistcorner.com)

This came from a Calvinist website.

Grace,

You have effectively displayed what I have already known - that Calvinists themselves haven't even agreed among themselves what they believe. That's because it is double-talk. They say, for example, that man is totally depraved and can never choose good - but then they will say that man can choose good at a later time...What ever is convenient for the moment, that's what they believe - and then next month, they believe something else. They re-define terms to suit the moment, meanwhile totally ignoring the implications. They claim that God is sovereign, but when He speaks in Scriptures, they ignore God. For example, the term synergy and its use in the Bible. Calvinists WILL NOT HAVE IT SO, even though it is the Word of God...

Man cannot choose good because he was made for perdition, but it's man's fault that he sins...Another example of the "air-tight" common sense of Calvinism.

Then, they have God as either a liar or very confused - since HE said that He desires ALL men to be saved - while ACTIVELY CREATING men for the end purpose of entering hell for eternity (so they claim). No matter what the man does, he is hell-bound, because it is God's good pleasure - meanwhile, this god of theirs claims to love and desire all men to be saved...

More double talk...

Oh, I could go on and on with the double speak. I have found that it is a VERY frustrating exercise to discuss theology with someone who holds to opposites at the same time, emphasizing one at the expense of the other every other month. I hope you have better luck...

Thanks for your posts,

Regards

 

[mondar]

What I disagree with is the assumption that Calvin made that it must then be predestined. The scriptures above say nothing of this. This part is all an assumption by John Calvin.

\

How do you read passages like Romans 8:28; Eph 1:5,11?

You could say "I disagree with Calvin's understanding of predestination." Or you could say that "Calvin misunderstood the biblical concept of predestination." But to say that the scriptures above say nothing about predestination is an argument based completely on the silence. Just because a few verses do not mention predestination does not deny that other verses do in fact speak of predestination.

In Ephesians 1:11, you might ask the question "what is our inhertiance?" By verse 14 Paul will be speaking of this inheritance as related to Redemption.

 

[GraceBwithU]

What I disagree with is the assumption that Calvin made that it must then be predestined. The scriptures above say nothing of this. This part is all an assumption by John Calvin.

\

How do you read passages like Romans 8:28; Eph 1:5,11?

You could say "I disagree with Calvin's understanding of predestination." Or you could say that "Calvin misunderstood the biblical concept of predestination." But to say that the scriptures above say nothing about predestination is an argument based completely on the silence. Just because a few verses do not mention predestination does not deny that other verses do in fact speak of predestination.

In Ephesians 1:11, you might ask the question "what is our inhertiance?" By verse 14 Paul will be speaking of this inheritance as related to Redemption.

What I was saying is the scriptures say nothing about this being the only way that man will turn to God.

I do happen to believe in predestined election. I just don't believe it was as absolute to every individual as Calvin taught.

What God did predestine is His plan for salvation and all that would be required to make it come to past. If certain individuals were necessary for this to happen as were the disciples then he named them. However, whether Joe Smith down the street accepted the gospel or not would not effect His plan in the least. So some have no choice because they were needed to lay the foundation of the church and see that the world would have the opportunity to accept the gospel. The rest of us have to choose.

Rom 8:29
...he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son...
KJV

This is part of His promise to those that are the elect some are appointed, others choose to believe and therefore are elected and regenerated. :D

 

[Devekut]

What I dont understand about this "total depravity" thing is that...

If, as Mondar did point out, man in his totally depraved state can still choose to obey his conscience and nature in light of many goods (ie. loving your children, refraining from murder, doing kind deeds)

...if man, while still totally depraved, can choose these goods (albeit NOT everytime)....then why is it that he is rendered literally and fully incapable of ever choosing or orienting himself to THE GOOD. God, the highest Good and the source from which all goods flow?

If God is the source of all goodness, as I dont think a Calvinist would deny, isn't the participation in any moral good something of an orientation to God Himself? Even though unknowlingly?

I guess I dont see how we can choose some moral goods, but never God.

 

[GraceBwithU]

What I dont understand about this "total depravity" thing is that...

If, as Mondar did point out, man in his totally depraved state can still choose to obey his conscience and nature in light of many goods (ie. loving your children, refraining from murder, doing kind deeds)

...if man, while still totally depraved, can choose these goods (albeit NOT everytime)....then why is it that he is rendered literally and fully incapable of ever choosing or orienting himself to THE GOOD. God, the highest Good and the source from which all goods flow?

If God is the source of all goodness, as I dont think a Calvinist would deny, isn't the participation in any moral good something of an orientation to God Himself? Even though unknowlingly?

I guess I dont see how we can choose some moral goods, but never God.

Excellant point. Calvin seems to made a lot of assumptions to complete his doctrine the way he wanted it to turn out. he seems to have predestined the ending to his doctrine before he wrote the first chapter.

:D

 

[francisdesales]

I do happen to believe in predestined election. I just don't believe it was as absolute to every individual as Calvin taught.

True. Predestined to what? Calvinists ASSUME that Paul is speaking of being predestined to heaven. I have yet to see someone show me definitely that Paul says an individual is guaranteed eternal life. When Paul speaks of being elect, he is speaking of being elect into the Church, the community of God. Paul presumes that once elected, that one would continue to work out their salvation and persevere, but he never says it is already accomplished. It doesn't follow that one will CONTINUE in the Church of God. We find a number of examples in Scriptures where some do NOT persevere - and return to the vomit of their former lives. This is the presumption they make. Predestination to heaven is not found in Scriptures - it is a presumption based on twisting Paul's intent. Thus, Calvin builds on presumptions that are refuted by Scriptures.

Regards

 

[golfjack]

For the Calvanists here: How do you know that you are the elect? I can assure you that the Divine elect are the remnant Jews.


Peace, Golfjack

 

[GraceBwithU]

I do happen to believe in predestined election. I just don't believe it was as absolute to every individual as Calvin taught.

True. Predestined to what? Calvinists ASSUME that Paul is speaking of being predestined to heaven. I have yet to see someone show me definitely that Paul says an individual is guaranteed eternal life. When Paul speaks of being elect, he is speaking of being elect into the Church, the community of God. Paul presumes that once elected, that one would continue to work out their salvation and persevere, but he never says it is already accomplished. It doesn't follow that one will CONTINUE in the Church of God. We find a number of examples in Scriptures where some do NOT persevere - and return to the vomit of their former lives. This is the presumption they make. Predestination to heaven is not found in Scriptures - it is a presumption based on twisting Paul's intent. Thus, Calvin builds on presumptions that are refuted by Scriptures.

Regards

I believe that God predestined everything neccesary for His plan of the church and salvation to take place according to his will, including the individuals needed to lay the foundation of the church. As in the verse below. One must understand that Jesus is talking to His disciples, not the world. They did not choose they were chosen.

John 15:16
16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

There are many things in the Bible that were predestined. The covenants for example. Many things about Israel. The over all plan for salvation.

Somethings that get twisted by the Calvinist are scriptures that are actually talking about God's promises to the elect. example

Titus 1:2
2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Paul is actually talking about God's promise of eternal life to the church or the elect. He is not talking about individuals. or who the elect would be.
God promised this before the world began to whosoever would believe in His son. :D

 

[mondar]

What I dont understand about this "total depravity" thing is that...

If, as Mondar did point out, man in his totally depraved state can still choose to obey his conscience and nature in light of many goods (ie. loving your children, refraining from murder, doing kind deeds)

...if man, while still totally depraved, can choose these goods (albeit NOT everytime)....then why is it that he is rendered literally and fully incapable of ever choosing or orienting himself to THE GOOD. God, the highest Good and the source from which all goods flow?

If God is the source of all goodness, as I dont think a Calvinist would deny, isn't the participation in any moral good something of an orientation to God Himself? Even though unknowlingly?

I guess I dont see how we can choose some moral goods, but never God.

Devekut, I think the problem is you do not see the exceeding ugly sinfulness of sin.

Mankind goes about to establish his own sovereignty. He does not seek God, he does not submit to God. He is in rebellion against God. Does this mean that we are vicious animals eating raw human flesh and killing everything in sight. No! of course not! Humanity can still show love to others, people can show kindness, but these things do not make us righteous in the sight of God. We are still in rebellion against God.

Devekut, again, you feel Calvinism is wrong, because it does not feel like the person who is in rebellion can actually love. Your statement above misses the terrible rebellion of sin. It minimizes the offense of our sins in the sight of God. Our sin was so bad, the wrath of God had to be poured out, and there was nothing of sufficient value to take our place but the very blood of the Son of God.

 

[unred typo]

I do happen to believe in predestined election. I just don't believe it was as absolute to every individual as Calvin taught.

True. Predestined to what? Calvinists ASSUME that Paul is speaking of being predestined to heaven. I have yet to see someone show me definitely that Paul says an individual is guaranteed eternal life. When Paul speaks of being elect, he is speaking of being elect into the Church, the community of God. Paul presumes that once elected, that one would continue to work out their salvation and persevere, but he never says it is already accomplished. It doesn't follow that one will CONTINUE in the Church of God. We find a number of examples in Scriptures where some do NOT persevere - and return to the vomit of their former lives. This is the presumption they make. Predestination to heaven is not found in Scriptures - it is a presumption based on twisting Paul's intent. Thus, Calvin builds on presumptions that are refuted by Scriptures.

Regards

I believe that God predestined everything neccesary for His plan of the church and salvation to take place according to his will, including the individuals needed to lay the foundation of the church. As in the verse below. One must understand that Jesus is talking to His disciples, not the world. They did not choose they were chosen.

John 15:16
16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

There are many things in the Bible that were predestined. The covenants for example. Many things about Israel. The over all plan for salvation.

Somethings that get twisted by the Calvinist are scriptures that are actually talking about God's promises to the elect. example

Titus 1:2
2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Paul is actually talking about God's promise of eternal life to the church or the elect. He is not talking about individuals. or who the elect would be.
God promised this before the world began to whosoever would believe in His son. :D

Excellent posts. I agree and I must say, I thought I was pretty much alone in my view. This is an early Christmas to have fellow believers on the same page together.

I was feeling rather alone in this idea.
.·¯`·.. ..·¯`·..
<-))))><...·¯`·.. .<-))))><.·¯`·.. . .·¯`·..
..·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·.. .·¯`·.. <-))))><..·¯`·..<-))))><.·¯`·.. ..·¯`·.. .·¯`·.. ><((((º>
.<-))))><.·¯`·.. . .·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·..
.·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·...<-))))><.·¯`·.. . .·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·..
.·¯`·.. ..·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·.. <-))))><.·¯`·..
.·¯`·.. ..·¯`·..

 

[mondar]

For the Calvanists here: How do you know that you are the elect? I can assure you that the Divine elect are the remnant Jews.


Peace, Golfjack

Hmmm, and who might the Calvinists be here? Does anyone here claim to be a Calvinist?

I am glad for my Arminian brothers in the Lord who know of the grace of God.

GolfJack, your post seems fairly simple to refute. Colossians 2:13 is about salvation, not election to be the Jewish remnant.

2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: