The Value of Evangelism in Reformed Theology

[Hospes]

Hospes

Hi Hospes,,,,
Have you forgotten my post to you, no. 396?

I find your idea that God causes you to do everything (read your bible, etc)....which means you have no free will....
but you still think it's necessary to offer the gospel message to persons.

If you don't care to reply, that's fine --- I just thought it would be interesting to get into the matter of libertarian free will....
And, by the way, if we do NOT have free will, then we are just robots.

Hope to hear from you.

Wondering, when I engage with you I sense we are just talking past one another. I write something and you reply, but it seems your reply is not really engaging what I have written, but rather is a list of points you have already made. (Please know I honestly do not mean to be insulting.) I don't mind disagreement, but I get worn out if I feel like there is no real wrestling with one another's ideas. For instance, if I were to tell you I believe that everyone who chooses to love God, does so willingly, I'd expect to probably not get much interest from you on how I can be a Calvinist and yet believe this. No real engagement with my ideas. So as much as I'd enjoy engaging you, sadly I'm not sure it will work.

 

[JLB]

I thought I'd let you know my delayed responses are largely due to having a paying job, at least for the next 2-3 months. Upon retiring, my plan is to - by sheer volume of posts - wear down anyone who disagrees with me. I figure if I can't win arguments with winsome argument, I will win by exhausting my opponent.

Amen. Looking forward to it. I enjoy your posts.
You are different than many of the Calvinists I have discussed with in the past.

You seem to be very insightful and intelligent.



Thanks, JLB

 

[Hospes]

Amen. Looking forward to it. I enjoy your posts.
You are different than many of the Calvinists I have discussed with in the past.

You seem to be very insightful and intelligent.



Thanks, JLB

Thank you, JLB. I feel awkward at your appreciation, in that I owe all to my Lord. Anyway, thank you and I have to tell you I also have enjoyed our "sparring in love." May God use both of us to further the iron-on-iron sharpening of our devotion to Him and His truth and our love for one another.

 

[JLB]

Thank you, JLB. I feel awkward at your appreciation, in that I owe all to my Lord. Anyway, thank you and I have to tell you I also have enjoyed our "sparring in love." May God use both of us to further the iron-on-iron sharpening of our devotion to Him and His truth and our love for one another.

 

[GodsGrace]

Wondering, when I engage with you I sense we are just talking past one another. I write something and you reply, but it seems your reply is not really engaging what I have written, but rather is a list of points you have already made. (Please know I honestly do not mean to be insulting.) I don't mind disagreement, but I get worn out if I feel like there is no real wrestling with one another's ideas. For instance, if I were to tell you I believe that everyone who chooses to love God, does so willingly, I'd expect to probably not get much interest from you on how I can be a Calvinist and yet believe this. No real engagement with my ideas. So as much as I'd enjoy engaging you, sadly I'm not sure it will work.

What do you mean by getting worn out by one another's ideas?
Calvinism is a set theological theory.
It has soteriology that is different from any other denomination and was not in existance until about 1,500AD.

If you believe a person can CHOSE to love God and does so WILLINGLY (by the standard definitions) then you are not calvinist in theology.
You probably mean willingly because God makes your will be compatible with His willl---and thus we have compatible free will, which is no
free will at all.

I'm not here to engage with YOUR ideas, but to discuss calvinism, or the reformed faith, and state why I believe it is wrong, along with every other denomination.
(I know that calvinism is not a denomination-but am referring to those that do, like Presbytarianism for instance.

Anyway, believe what you will - just remember that this theology that Calvin (and others) set forth, change the character of God
and God is not properly represented by the reformed faith.

P.S. I retain the right to comment on any statement in your posts. Even if you don't care to respond.

 

[humble soul]

I'm glad I know nothing about Calvinism. I might not like it either. And start feeling that Calvinists are aliens from Mars trying to take over the world. So better I stay ignorant.

 

[jasonc]

I'm glad I know nothing about Calvinism. I might not like it either. And start feeling that Calvinists are aliens from Mars trying to take over the world. So better I stay ignorant.

they aren't .shsesh,imagine living in a town where if you know the bible and search a church out you can't find out any statement of faith ,or if you do ,its 7 lines .seldom is deep theology taught .

while not true in all cases ,I have used church websites to find history of them and to see if they are apostate .

reformed Calvinists tend not to be churches who use rock concert like worship in service ,seeker friendly or the word of faith types .

 

[Hospes]

I'm glad I know nothing about Calvinism. I might not like it either. And start feeling that Calvinists are aliens from Mars trying to take over the world. So better I stay ignorant.

I am not from Mars! I'm from Arizona, which does resemble Mars in spots, so it's an easy mistake to make.

 

[humble soul]

I am not from Mars! I'm from Arizona, which does resemble Mars in spots, so it's an easy mistake to make.

You seem remarkably human Hospes.

 

[Hospes]

If you believe a person can CHOSE to love God and does so WILLINGLY (by the standard definitions) then you are not calvinist in theology.

Always have to smile to myself when someone better knows where I land theologically than I do.

For instance, if I were to tell you I believe that everyone who chooses to love God, does so willingly, I'd expect to probably not get much interest from you on how I can be a Calvinist and yet believe this. No real engagement with my ideas. So as much as I'd enjoy engaging you, sadly I'm not sure it will work.

If you believe a person can CHOSE to love God and does so WILLINGLY (by the standard definitions) then you are not calvinist in theology.
You probably mean willingly because God makes your will be compatible with His willl---and thus we have compatible free will, which is no free will at all.

Wondering, this is the type of reply that makes me think we can't engage each other. I suggest that you'd not be interested in how I could believe, as a Calvinist, that everyone who chooses to love God, does so willingly. Your response shows no desire to try to understand me further. It's just two statements, one telling me if I believe a certain way, I am not a Calvinist. The second surmises what I believe and how it is wrong.

Also, in your post, you state a number of conclusions but offer no real arguments; they are just the final conclusion statements of unarticulated arguments:

1. "Calvinism is a set theological theory."
2. "It has soteriology that is different from any other denomination and was not in existence until about 1,500AD."
3. "this theology that Calvin (and others) set forth, changes the character of God."
4. "God is not properly represented by the reformed faith."

The best way to convince me of the validity of a conclusion is to guide me through the premises that support it. Because I think you know this, I figure it must be more important to you to get your conclusions out there than it is to convince me of them. In other words, you really don't want dialog, just monolog.

P.S. I retain the right to comment on any statement in your posts. Even if you don't care to respond

You should feel free to comment. I apologize if I seemed to express otherwise.

 

[GodsGrace]

Always have to smile to myself when someone better knows where I land theologically than I do.

Well, are you a calvinist or not??
I happen to know calvinist theology....
what do you believe I said that is wrong?
Calvinism does not believe in free will.....free will is missing from THE TULIP.
You mention CHOICE...choice is inherent in free will --- calvinism DOES NOT believe in man having choice.

T Total Depravity teaches that man is UNABLE to come to God on his own. Thus - no free will.
U Unconditional Election teaches that man is chosen by God and has nothing to do with his salvation. Thus - no free will.
L Limited Atonement teaches that Jesus died for just a select few and not for the whole world, as our bible teaches.
I Irresistible grace teaches that we cannot refuse God's grace. Thus - no free will.
P Perseverance of the saints teaches that those God chooses will persevere in good works till they die. Thus - no free will.

Wondering, this is the type of reply that makes me think we can't engage each other. I suggest that you'd not be interested in how I could believe, as a Calvinist, that everyone who chooses to love God, does so willingly. Your response shows no desire to try to understand me further. It's just two statements, one telling me if I believe a certain way, I am not a Calvinist. The second surmises what I believe and how it is wrong.

Also, in your post, you state a number of conclusions but offer no real arguments; they are just the final conclusion statements of unarticulated arguments:

1. "Calvinism is a set theological theory."
2. "It has soteriology that is different from any other denomination and was not in existence until about 1,500AD."
3. "this theology that Calvin (and others) set forth, changes the character of God."
4. "God is not properly represented by the reformed faith."

Exactly WHAT do you believe is wrong with the above statements?
My conclusions are correct, unless you can show otherwise - which it's apparent you are not willing to do.

The best way to convince me of the validity of a conclusion is to guide me through the premises that support it. Because I think you know this, I figure it must be more important to you to get your conclusions out there than it is to convince me of them. In other words, you really don't want dialog, just monolog.

You should feel free to comment. I apologize if I seemed to express otherwise.

You want me to guide you through the premise that supports what I believe?
I'm quoting calvinist theology to you.
You need convincing of them?

Yes, so far it's been a monolog because you've answered to nothing of what I've posted.
I'd say it's due to YOUR responses --- not mine.

 

[Hospes]

Well, are you a calvinist or not??
I happen to know calvinist theology....
what do you believe I said that is wrong?
Calvinism does not believe in free will.....free will is missing from THE TULIP.
You mention CHOICE...choice is inherent in free will --- calvinism DOES NOT believe in man having choice.

T Total Depravity teaches that man is UNABLE to come to God on his own. Thus - no free will.
U Unconditional Election teaches that man is chosen by God and has nothing to do with his salvation. Thus - no free will.
L Limited Atonement teaches that Jesus died for just a select few and not for the whole world, as our bible teaches.
I Irresistible grace teaches that we cannot refuse God's grace. Thus - no free will.
P Perseverance of the saints teaches that those God chooses will persevere in good works till they die. Thus - no free will.



Exactly WHAT do you believe is wrong with the above statements?
My conclusions are correct, unless you can show otherwise - which it's apparent you are not willing to do.

You want me to guide you through the premise that supports what I believe?
I'm quoting calvinist theology to you.
You need convincing of them?

Yes, so far it's been a monolog because you've answered to nothing of what I've posted.
I'd say it's due to YOUR responses --- not mine.

Okay, Wondering, I will do my best to engage you, but let's move in small steps.

Let me first try to be sure I understand you. Will you give me your definition of "free will"?

 

[Fastfredy0]

Okay, Wondering, I will do my best to engage you, but let's move in small steps.

Let me first try to be sure I understand you. Will you give me your definition of "free will"?

This could be interesting.

Here's a possibility:

Free Will / Choice
Libertarian Free Will - Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty).

Reformed Free Will (my choice)
Augustine’s Definition - one always chooses that which he desires most at the time

Johnathon Edwards Definition - A man never, in any instance, wills anything contrary to his desires [greatest perceived pleasing of chooser], or desires anything contrary to his Will. The Determination of the Will, supposes an effect, which must have a cause.

 

[jasonc]

Okay, Wondering, I will do my best to engage you, but let's move in small steps.

Let me first try to be sure I understand you. Will you give me your definition of "free will"?

I'm,not Calvinist my self but after listening to them and reading up,on it .

many don't understand the argument of will and sadly both sides of this .

free will on us ,God Doesntt negate our actions ,he just knows us before we existed as he foreseen,and doesn't waste time on the types that won't serve him or believe .

the Lord exists out of time .our birth and death and in between is nothing he doesn't know .

that's what I was told .some of which I believe .our wills are limited ,I want to quit or change but lack power .

 

[Hospes]

free will on us ,God Doesntt negate our actions ,he just knows us before we existed as he foreseen,and doesn't waste time on the types that won't serve him or believe .

Jasonc, I have known people who believe that foreknowledge of a choice somehow does not limit a person's choice, but I just can't understand it. At the time a person is faced with choice, can they choose anything other than the single choice that God foreknows? If they can't, then how can they have any real free moral agency? And if they can, then God's foreknowledge was wrong. Seems a dilemma to me.

 

[Hospes]

Augustine’s Definition - one always chooses that which he desires most at the time

The problem with this definition is that it is much too easily understood and lacks the required number of words. Any true sophisticate would immediately see it is inadequate and would reject it outright. You should be ashamed for even passing it on.
:wink

 

[TibiasDad]

Free Will / Choice
Libertarian Free Will - Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty).

1) Where did this definition come from?
2) I would disagree with the specifics of this definition. Liberty does not necessitate "a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias", it only requires the authority to choose A rather than B at any given time. The will must possess the means of either choice, in spite of the inward inclinations, previous biases, or previous choices.

I may be inclined to do A, as previous evidences may express, but this does not necessitate that I will always do A, even in the exact same set of conditions. I may (hypothetically) want to steal, watch porn, or have an affair as I have before in a given circumstance, but the situation being the same does not mean I must invariably choose to repeat the behavior again.

Freedom is the ability (not the probability) to do something different in any given situation.

Reformed Free Will (my choice)
Augustine’s Definition - one always chooses that which he desires most at the time

Johnathon Edwards Definition - A man never, in any instance, wills anything contrary to his desires [greatest perceived pleasing of chooser], or desires anything contrary to his Will. The Determination of the Will, supposes an effect, which must have a cause.

1) What is the distinction between "Free" and "Liberated" choice. I see no real difference. To say I have "free will" to eat pumpkin pie, is the same as saying I have "liberty of will" to eat pumpkin pie.

2) Where does Augustine say "one always chooses that which he desires most at the time", and does this mean that the thing he desires most must always be identical given the same conditions? Again, it is not a question of probability, but of absolute necessity.

3) The will being determined, in the Reformed sense of meaning, is the effect, and the cause is God's sovereign volition and desire. Man has no freedom, no liberty at all!


Doug

 

[Hospes]

Good gracious! I ask Wondering for a definition and everyone comes out or the woodwork to offer definitions!

(My apologies to anyone not knowing the American idiom "come out or the woodwork"

 

[jasonc]

Good gracious! I ask Wondering for a definition and everyone comes out or the woodwork to offer definitions!

(My apologies to anyone not knowing the American idiom "come out or the woodwork"

well just postulate this ,

some try to become meter readers ,they can't and are fired ,some try to become soldiers are get booted ,others try to teach ,they can't ,in all these cases ,some can .yet all willed they wanted to .

not all have the ability ,that's a limit .then there's those who have the desire to quit habits ,pray and they quit ,others die from that habit of if not a fatal one but a bad one with it ,that's a limit ,God sometimes allows that ,or our desires ,we aren't wanting to quit or do .with salvation I really don't see that any different .the offer is given and some just won't truly repent and be lost .we don't know .but God does .the longer I see my struggle with sin the more I see truth to the idea of total depravity and limited free will ,we by nature don't desire God .

 

[Hospes]

well just postulate this ,

some try to become meter readers ,they can't and are fired ,some try to become soldiers are get booted ,others try to teach ,they can't ,in all these cases ,some can .yet all willed they wanted to .

not all have the ability ,that's a limit .then there's those who have the desire to quit habits ,pray and they quit ,others die from that habit of if not a fatal one but a bad one with it ,that's a limit ,God sometimes allows that ,or our desires ,we aren't wanting to quit or do .with salvation I really don't see that any different .the offer is given and some just won't truly repent and be lost .we don't know .but God does .the longer I see my struggle with sin the more I see truth to the idea of total depravity and limited free will ,we by nature don't desire God .

First, thanks for this. It spurs my thinking.

You are right that we can make choices to do something that we do not have the ability to successfully do. If I am lifting weights in the gym, I may decide to lift a barbell loaded with 500 pounds, but I do not have the ability to do it. I am free to decide/choose something but limited in doing what I have decided/chosen.

Maybe not explicitly stated, but implicitly I know there are some folks that believe God does not ask of His children what we can not do. (I happen to disagree.)

the longer I see my struggle with sin the more I see truth to the idea of total depravity and limited free will ,we by nature don't desire God .

I live and know what you are describing. Because I do, I am ever grateful for the Gospel and look forward to when the struggle is over and by nature I purely love my Lord.