"The Many Errors of Calvinism" -

[farouk]

Danus: I know what you mean by Luther's style. Calvin, in contrast, is more cerebral and sedate. But with Luther, you almost get the impression that he is munching at the table with you, in the middle of a hearty, and not entirely serious, argument with other diners.

 

[Danus]

...yes I think that's a good way to put it. Calvin is a brilliant nerd for the most part.

I found this I thought I share. This is a brief history of Calvin's doctrine concerning Predestination and the elect. These are the most troubling points to most folks. I'm only pasting part of it, but I'll add the link to the source.

“Electionâ€
Dr. David E. Gray
Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church
http://www.bradleyhillschurch.org/article196681.htm

How did Calvin develop his view on this idea? Donald McKim, one of the best writers on Calvin that I know, writes that “For Calvin, the doctrine of predestination emerged out of a very practical situation. Why was it, he wondered, that some people believed in the Christian gospel and have faith, and others didn’t? That was a pastoral problem. Calvin’s answer was that some people believed because God through the Holy Spirit granted them the gift of faith. That was the sign of election.†Secondly, from the theologian Augustine in the 5th century. Third, he got it from scripture. In Matthew 22, Jesus says, “Many are called, but few are chosen.†Jesus, in John 13, says, “I know whom I have chosen.†In John 17, Jesus said “I am not asking on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those who you gave me.†The focus on justice in both testaments and the passages in our second lessons from Paul’s letters to Rome and Ephesus support this idea.

Throughout most of history, when the Christian church had opportunities to repudiate this doctrine, it didn’t. In the 4th century A.D., some Christians supported the ideas of a monk named Pelagius who believe that human beings could choose good or evil without divine intervention. Yet the church sided with Augustine, though today I believe the majority of Protestant churches and certainly Catholic churches are as semi-Pelagion. During the Reformation, a similar controversy over sin and grace arose between the followers of Calvin and those of a Dutch theological named Arminius and in the early 17th century the church sided with Calvin.

But finally in the 20th century, the Presbyterian church broadened its understanding of election and placed this concept of election side by side with another important concept. God’s love.

Reformed theologians like Karl Barth reframed the doctrine of election. In Barth’s view of double predestination, only one person was destined to spend time in Hell and that is Jesus, who spent three days there before rising from the grave. For Barth, because of God’s love, Christ suffered the punishment that we all deserve so that we could have life.

So our denomination amended its understanding of the Westminster Confession of Faith to read that “the doctrine of predestination is to be ‘held in harmony with the doctrine of [God's] love to all mankind . . . [and] with the doctrine that God desires not the death of any sinner, but has provided in Christ a salvation sufficient for all.’â€

And there is strong scriptural support for this view.

We heard in First Timothy that Nancy read that “God desires everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth.†In 2 Peter we hear “that God is patient, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.†Moreover, we know that Jesus is the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.†The central tenants of Christianity from John 3: 16 and continuing into verse 17 reads, “God so loved the world that he sent his only son that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world might be saved through him.â€

Paul himself writes to Corinth that “All die in Adam so all will be made alive in Christ.†He writes to the Colossians that God was pleased to reconcile “all things†to himself. And to the Romans, “one man’s act of righteousness leads to the justification and life for all.†And also that “God imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all.†Paul writes to the Ephesians that our God is a gracious God who “gathers all things to him in Christ.â€

There is a reason why I have quoted from a variety of passages all written by Paul that seem to contradict each other on election. Paul clearly struggled with the issue. So has the church has throughout the centuries.



However you view predestination, and the Bible supports a variety of nuanced views on the subject, I think we do best to focus on the areas where scripture is consistent and that is on the gracious acts of a sovereign, loving God. That is the heart of election for me and the part that I have found to be most the comforting, the most helpful, that feels most real and that I believe is most supported by scripture.

The passages on both sides of the election debate depict God as a sovereign, in charge of our present and future. Paul wrote to the Ephesians about “the mystery of God’s will,†and I believe mystery remains, for I do not believe we were meant to fully understand, let alone obsess about, be competitive about, try to earn or worry about God’s process of salvation. Salvation is God’s business, not ours.

Scripture depicts God as loving. I return to Paul’s letter to the Ephesians that is at the center of his discussion of election, that God has a plan to “gather up all things (to Godself) in Christ.†Like a loving parent lovingly gathering her children.

Shirley Guthrie writes, the Bible “never directly or explicitly talks about a plan from the beginning of time to save some people and damn the rest.†Instead I think of Dietrich Bonheoffer who wrote, “Through every event, however, untoward, there is always a way through to God.â€

And God is gracious. Election depends on God, on who God is and what God does, rather than on who you are and what you do. And thank goodness we do not have to rely on ourselves.

I believe that rather than simply making all decisions ahead of time and then leaving creation on its own, God is still actively involved in our world. Electing us for service in the world and giving us hope for a future life in Christ. Showering us with grace even when we do not deserve it. Each of us here has the stirring of the spirit at some level to bring us here. God is speaking to us, calling us, and our faith is the fruit of it. And I have great hope for what that means for our eternal futures. For our God is a God who gives us the benefit of the doubt.

One of you wrote me this week about those small moments of God’s grace. The God I know through prayer, meditation, scripture and those small moments of grace where you just know the Lord is present makes me think more about God and worry less about myself. Because the God I read about and the God I have come to know is a God that gives us the benefit of the doubt.

God did not give up on Jonah and continued to pursue him. God sent prophets to Israel when they fell off the path. Like Jeremiah who tried to run away from God’s election. And God sent God’s son to us. Jesus gave the benefit of the doubt, even saying to the criminal on the cross at the last minute of both their earthly lives, “today you will be with me in paradise.â€

God did not give up on Calvin either, and because of that Calvin did not give up on himself. In 1538, two years after Calvin wrote his first draft of the Institutes, Calvin was kicked out of Geneva and forced to live in Strasburg. There he struggled. He had to sell many of his precious theology books to buy food. He learned the meaning of exile. He also learned the meaning of God’s sovereignty, love and grace. When he returned to Geneva he was a more mature, thankful, and focused man who thought less of himself and more of God. He had been saved in his own way. And his revisions of Institutes reflect that.

Whatever God has decided, is deciding or will decide, have faith that the fundamental character of God is not to give up on us, but to give us time and the benefit of the doubt. And because God has not given up on us, neither should we. Thanks be to God. Amen.

 

[zeke]

Now come on. This is not fair.

But it is fair and you didn't answer my questions. Let me re-state them. Regarding the five-points – do you preach “repent or perish” to the lost? If you do, why do you preach it when Calvinism teaches that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.
(Luk 13:3)​

Also, do you identify more with Wesley? What labels might you wear, or do you?

I identify with Jesus Christ which eliminates most labels. Like Calvin, Wesley taught truth and error.

 

[zeke]

Tulip Truth is part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ !

Actually, much of it is not but maybe you can present a bit more commentary to support what you believe.

 

[zeke]

Man does not choose to save himself. he either will be saved or he won't. Does God choose? Is it a cooperative effort between God and man? Both Luther and Calvin say NO, it is God and God alone, and until we understand that we are to question are salvation.

Yep, pretty bold statement.

Yep - a boldly incorrect statement - salvation is God's gift freely given to those who do something and that something is to obey the Lord from the heart. God offers salvation freely and man must receive that gift via obedience.

But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.
(Rom 6:17)​

 

[Danus]

But it is fair and you didn't answer my questions. Let me re-state them. Regarding the five-points – do you preach “repent or perish” to the lost? If you do, why do you preach it when Calvinism teaches that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.
(Luk 13:3)​

This has nothing to do with addressing the 5 points of Calvin. What do I preach? well, I consider myself a servant of God. I'm not a preacher by vocation, just so you know.

The lost are not found by me, but it's possible that they might find Christ through me. Christ knows the lost, so they are not lost to him, nor is it my duty as a servant to God to find, or identify them, but to serve him by serving them. Repentance is obvious to those God gives a measure of faith to.

I could stand on the corner and point to people and tell them to repent, but it's a wasted effort for those who are not effected by God, and as far as I know, no one has ever come to God by way of someone dragging them to God.

Rather, it has been said that evangelism is simply one beggar telling another where to find bread. Why wast time telling someone who is not hungry where to eat? This is a rhetorical question BTW.

I identify with Jesus Christ which eliminates most labels. Like Calvin, Wesley taught truth and error.

I see. Well I'm glad you agree with Jesus. There was once a rich man who also agreed with Jesus, but he could not bring himself to follow him. Jesus himself said; "Not everyone who says Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of haven."

My point here is that you will need to do better than that if we are going to discuss Calvin's points. saying you identify with Christ does not in and of itself lend any credibility to you. Heck, Jim Jones identified with Christ.

Is there a point of Calvin's you'd like to discuss? What do you struggle with the most about what this insane :p man had to say? :fullauto Calvin

Yep - a boldly incorrect statement - salvation is God's gift freely given to those who do something and that something is to obey the Lord from the heart. God offers salvation freely and man must receive that gift via obedience.

But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.
(Rom 6:17)​

Well here is your label, Armenian, or "Wesleyist"

Ok, enough fun. Let's talk about the non-elect.

We know that people do in fact die without Christ, not saved. This is a biblical fact. So these would be the non-elect. However, we really can't stop there. We need to define this further.

Calvin never said that people can't be or become saved. He did say that some people are not saved. This is true. There are people that die who are not saved.

Did God know they would not be saved before they where born? Yes. Could he have saved them? Yes. Does he? No, because the people who die unsaved, die unsaved.

We are about to journey down the rabbit hole my friend. Do you want to come along?

 

[zeke]

We are about to journey down the rabbit hole my friend.*Do you want to come along?

I am not much in favor of rabbit holes and you appear to be deficient in Calvin's theology. I would refer you to you own warning in the OP. Do some research and we can continue.

WARNING: please don't post in here if your unsure about John Calvin's theology. If you need to do some research, please do so first.

 

[Danus]

I am not much in favor of rabbit holes and you appear to be deficient in Calvin's theology. I would refer you to you own warning in the OP. Do some research and we can continue.

Not at all. We are talking about unconditional election, and I can assure you I am pretty well versed on Calvin.

John 15:16: "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you."

Acts 13:48: "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."

Romans 9:15-16: "For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."

Romans 9:22-24: "What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessles of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make the riches of his glory for vessles of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory - even us whom he has called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?"

Ephesians 1:4-5: "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,"

Ephesians 1:11: "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,"

Philippians 1:29: "For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake"

1 Thessalonians 1:4-5: "For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake."

2 Thessalonians 2:13: "But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification [by the Spirit] and belief in the truth."

2 Timothy 1:9: "who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,"

Some biblical passages are put forth as evidence that human volition, not just divine action, plays a central role in salvation

Deuteronomy 30:19: "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death,(A) blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live."

Joshua 24:15: "And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell."

"Calvinists" generally understand the former passages as giving a window into the divine perspective, and the latter passages as speaking from the human perspective in calling people to work out the salvation God has given them.

Is that enough research for you to continue? We'll also have to get into Predestination as we come along. If you are willing?...that last part was a joke. ...get it?

Getting late in my world. I'll catch you tomorrow as I have time.

 

[farouk]

zeke: Again, you are assuming that other people read Calvinism in the same way as you do; then you say that other people are being contradictory.

 

[zeke]

Not at all. We are talking about unconditional election, and I can assure you I am pretty well versed on Calvin.

Are you really well versed? Test question one more time – does the five-points teach that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

The doctrine of unconditional election presents the error that God chooses to condemn every human not “electedâ€. This serious error puts God in the position of creating the majority of mankind for the sole purpose of damning them - not giving them any opportunity to be saved via the blood of Christ.

But the God we know is the God....â€who desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.†Again – God is not a Calvinist.

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
(1Ti 2:3-4 NKJV)​

 

[zeke]

zeke: Again, you are assuming that other people read Calvinism in the same way as you do; then you say that other people are being contradictory.

You keep saying that my friend but the words of Calvin speak for themselves and the meaning is quite clear. What exactly is being represented - in your mind? Please be specific.

“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.†~ John Calvin

..for there is no respect of persons with God.
(Rom 2:11 ASV)​

.​

 

[farouk]

You keep saying that my friend but the words of Calvin speak for themselves and the meaning is quite clear. What exactly is being represented - in your mind? Please be specific.

<b>“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.†~ John Calvin

..for there is no respect of persons with God.
(Rom 2:11 ASV)​

.</b>​

But we are not God.

The Lord commanded us to preach the Gospel; some will believe, some will not, but this does not affect our duty to preach the Gospel.

We don't know the end from the beginning and it's not the Gospel preacher's role to try to figure it out before presenting the Savior, which everyone needs.

Sometimes it's as if Thomas Jefferson wrote the preamble to the sort of Gospel that gets preached, to the effect of, Come and claim your (supposed) rights in Christ.

Whereas we need the Lord's grace and mercy. This is how I would generally understand Calvin's statement.

 

[Hitch]

You keep saying that my friend but the words of Calvin speak for themselves and the meaning is quite clear. What exactly is being represented - in your mind? Please be specific.

<b>“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.” ~ John Calvin

..for there is no respect of persons with God.
(Rom 2:11 ASV)​

.</b>​

What's the problem?

Are you implying God doesnt have the right make life and death decisions?

Hodge explains it very well;

The Calvinist, on the other hand, glorifies the free and sovereign grace of God by attributing to it alone all the efficiency in saving the believing sinner. It is God’s grace which makes the believer all he is. He feels this; of this at least he is absolutely sure. He is nothing more than a poor wandering sheep. The Good Shepherd has sought him out, found him, and carried him back on his breast. In himself and of himself in his entire history he is no better than his fellowmen who are lost. It is only God’s free grace, therefore, which has made the difference. The faith he has cannot have been the precondition of God’s choice, but God’s choice must have been the precedent cause of his faith....

III. The difficulty which all feel in attempting to receive this unquestionable truth of revelation, and assimilate it to the whole mass of our own thinking, respects (1) the freedom and responsibility of man, and (2) the holiness of God. How can man he free if from eternity all his actions have been certainly determined? And if God by his decree makes the future occurrence of each sin absolutely certain, how can he be holy? These combinations doubtless present puzzles of considerable difficulty to our minds in their present state of enlightenment. But these do not in any degree differ from a large class of problems which the imperfection and narrowness of our knowledge prevent us from solving. God’s decree, it is obvious, is not an immediate efficient cause which interferes with natural causes or which brings anything into being. It is simply an immanent plan or purpose in the divine mind which determines the certain occurrence of the events to which it relates. The same precisely is true with respect to the divine foreknowledge. All Christians believe that God eternally foreknows whatsoever shall be in the future. If his knowledge is real knowledge, it is certain; and if it is certain as knowledge, the events to which it relates must be certainly future. If the difficulty of reconciling certainty with the freedom of man or with the holiness of God does not move us to abandon his foreknowledge, it cannot be a rational motive for our denying the truth of his universal predestination. A God without foreknowledge would be only a blind force. Every argument which establishes theism on the evident teleology of the universe by equal cogency establishes the divine foreknowledge. Without the foreknowledge of God there would be no intelligent creation, no wise moral government, no ground for religious trust, no confidence for the future, no basis for either the prophecies or the promises of God. The foreknowledge admitted, there is no logical reason for excepting to his foreordination.

http://the-highway.com/articleAug02.html

 

[Danus]

Are you really well versed? Test question one more time – does the five-points teach that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

The doctrine of unconditional election presents the error that God chooses to condemn every human not “electedâ€. This serious error puts God in the position of creating the majority of mankind for the sole purpose of damning them - not giving them any opportunity to be saved via the blood of Christ.

But the God we know is the God....â€who desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.†Again – God is not a Calvinist.

You are adding to Calvin. You are reading into it like many do, and that's why your missing what he's saying. Your drawing your own conclusion to what you have read into it.

The non-elect are none repentant. The mark of the unelected are those who die unsaved. They have no desire to repent. God's choice in unconditional election is to save, not condemn. Man is already condemned. God is not actively making that choice. That was done in the garden.

The error is not in what Calvin said regarding this, but how you have interpreted it. If you don't want to understand Calvin honestly, then stay on that path, but it's not going to disprove Calvin factually, biblicaly or logically. If this is just a mud fight then it's pointless.

Anything more we can discuss on Unconditional Election, or can I clarify it more? That verse you have there is not against Calvin BTW. You still have to pair that with the fact that not all people are in fact saved, if you want to reconcile it.

 

[zeke]

What's the problem?

Are you implying God doesnt have the right make life and death decisions?

Well, Hitch I don't really have any problem and God can and will do as He determines. The questions that have yet to be answered are these - do you preach “repent or perish” to the lost? If you do, why do you preach it when Calvinism teaches that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish? God is not a Calvinist are you?

 

[zeke]

You are adding to Calvin.

Of course I am not. What part of his words are you missing...

“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.†~ John Calvin

..for there is no respect of persons with God. (Rom 2:11 ASV)​

Calvin's word vs. God's word. I will go with God as we all should do.

 

[farouk]

Well, Hitch I don't really have any problem and God can and will do as He determines. The questions that have yet to be answered are these - do you preach “repent or perish†to the lost? If you do, why do you preach it when Calvinism teaches that the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

zeke, my friend, yet again you are making big assumptions about how other people read Calvin, and various people called Calvinists.

God is not a Calvinist are you?

Sorry, but this is almost in the same sort of vein as impossible questions such as 'When did you stop beating your wife?'

If you want to go to Calvin directly, maybe his Institutes of the Christian Religion would be a good source to start, as regards finding directly what he said, rather than what might be someone else's summary.

You also seem to question whether the elect are eternally saved; I may have misunderstood you. The end of Romans 8 would seem to provide light on this; but I might have misunderstood your meaning.

 

[zeke]

zeke, my friend, yet again you are making big assumptions about how other people read Calvin, and various people called Calvinists.

I have presented Calvin's words - straight from the horses mouth. What more do you require?

Sorry, but this is almost in the same sort of vein as impossible questions such as 'When did you stop beating your wife?'

Asking someone if they are a Calvinist is the same as beating one's wife? How exactly does that work in your mind? Remember, there are many Calvinists who proudly wear that name.

You also seem to question whether the elect are eternally saved; I may have misunderstood you. The end of Romans 8 would seem to provide light on this; but I might have misunderstood your meaning.

The notion of “perseverance of the saints” is just one more of the 'many errors of Calvinism' that contradicts the universal truth found throughout the Bible – the truth that the "righteous man" (including a Christian) who turns from his righteousness to do evil and refuses to repent of his sins will die for the evil he has done – i.e., he will be eternally separated from God. One who is saved can turn away from the faith and be lost per Holy Writ. Romans 8 does not support Calvinistic dogma - Paul was not a Calvinist.

If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die. (Ezek 18:26)​

 

[Danus]

Of course I am not. What part of his words are you missing...

“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.” ~ John Calvin

..for there is no respect of persons with God. (Rom 2:11 ASV)​

Calvin's word vs. God's word. I will go with God as we all should do.

Unconditional election is the doctrine which states that God chose those whom he was pleased to bring to a knowledge of himself, not based upon any merit shown by the object of his grace and not based upon foreseen faith (especially a mere decisional faith). God has elected, based solely upon the counsel of his own will, some for glory and others for damnation (Romans 9:15, 21). He has done this act before the foundations of the world Ephesians 1: 4-8).

You keep thinking that God condemns, when in fact God is the one who saves....BY HIS GRACE and MERCY. That's it, and that alone. There is nothing man can do to initiate his own salvation. That's what this means.

What you have a hard time with is that I think you think it's just not fair. If God desires all to be saved why then does he not choose all? Is that a question you might have?

But, let's look at the fairness of God in the Arminian theology and turn the tables. If is was up to man then what about Helen Keller, or other disabled people, or or anyone who is without the ability to otherwise reason their own salvation? Does God just pick them because he see's the need to do so? How does that square with your theology if your saying it's up to each individual to initiate their own salvation? Does God grade on a curve? Where might we find scripture on that?

There is NO glory in man zeek. NONE. All the glory is Gods and Gods alone, and that's a huge part of this doctrine.

In Christian theology, "election" refers to God's choosing of individuals or peoples to be the objects of his GRACE or to otherwise fulfill his purposes.

Most often God's election is associated with his choice of individuals unto salvation. Calvin's view of election (also known as unconditional election) teaches that in eternity God chose some individuals from the mass of "ALREADY" fallen humanity unto salvation without regard to any merit or foreseen faith in them, but solely based on His sovereign intentions.He's not Damning, or condemning anyone. They are already in that state.

Election and predestination are very similar concepts to the point that the terms can sometimes be used interchangeably. However, there is a difference in the emphasis of the two terms.

Election primarily has in view - God's sovereign selection, whereas predestination accents the purpose or goal of His election. Scripture clearly teaches both election and predestination; however, there are a variety of views as to who, when, why and how God does this. WE DON'T know this part, nor has God reveled this, but again, this is for God's purpose and for God's Glory, NOT OURS, and people have a hard time with this because they want it to be about them. "LOOK AT ME GOD! Look how obedient I am! Look at good a person I am....God's message is that it's not about us, and again, Until we figure that out, we should question our salvation.

Can people be saved? Yes. There are plenty of people who are saved all the time. It's called being born again and it is a conversion from our fallen nature to our saved nature, and there is no going back from it.

 

[farouk]

Asking someone if they are a Calvinist is the same as beating one's wife?

No, you've turned what I said into something else.

You said:
God is not a Calvinist are you?




In response I suggested that this sort of question is just impossible to engage with, like the sort of question, 'When did you stop beating your wife?' (It's a widely quoted example.) If the person answers when, it already implies that he does beat his wife; if the person gives some sort of answer, but doesn't say when, then it can be taken to imply that he hasn't yet stopped beating his wife, even if he has actually never beaten his wife.

So, asking 'God is not a Calvinist are you?' isn't really a meaningful question, because it suggests that you, almost with the authority of God, have unique insights into what you think the various varieties of so called Calvinism mean, and it also suggests that you have decided to disparage the person you are talking to if he or she doesn't happen to hold the same view as you.

You asked for clarification, so I hope this helps.


"One who is saved can turn away from the faith and be lost per Holy Writ."

'Romans 8 does not support Calvinistic dogma - Paul was not a Calvinist.'

Romans 8 makes it clear that walking in righteous ways (not perfection, but following the Lord instead of a life of sin) is a characteristic of those who believe. John in His Epistle says, 'If we sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous'. 1 John 2.1. Romans 8 further makes it clear that the true believer is wondrously kept by the power of God.

So I hope this is helpful to you, friend.