When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are elect ?

[reba]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

I believe man is depraved. Call it totally, a little bit, how ever you wish. I will not stand before the God of all and challenge His Word. (romans 3) Man with out the Holy Spirit across the face of the earth would make the ugliest of animals.

Are some folks nicer than others, yes. We are not all the bottom of the barrel. We all have the capabilities of being the bottom.

For my part i will stop the yes, no game now. Scriptures have been posted thoughts laid out. And moderators dont get to play as much....;)


Thanks once again for keep a hot topic fairly pleasant

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Exactly. You cannot remove the Law from the process of salvation.



No there isn't. There is good and there is evil. There is no in between. You don't get to sin against God and say "Well, what I did was not technically sin."



Scripture?

Scripture request for man's worth.

Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

I believe man is depraved. Call it totally, a little bit, how ever you wish. I will not stand before the God of all and challenge His Word. (romans 3) Man with out the Holy Spirit across the face of the earth would make the ugliest of animals.

Are some folks nicer than others, yes. We are not all the bottom of the barrel. We all have the capabilities of being the bottom.

For my part i will stop the yes, no game now. Scriptures have been posted thoughts laid out. And moderators dont get to play as much....;)


Thanks once again for keep a hot topic fairly pleasant

Reba, John 3:16 states that, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." That tells is there that humanity was worth something to God, to the extent that He sent His Son to die for ALL the sins of everyone who ever lived. We must not forget that.

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

We are born as wicked enemies of God and we remain increasingly evil enemies of God unless He intervenes (which He does for those he chose before time began) and saves us.

If we are born as wicked enemies of God, why does Jesus say we should be converted and become as little children?

At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Fair enough. But look at the context in which Paul applies this Scripture. It's sandwiched between
Rom 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
and
Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Who does Paul refer to by "ALL" in v.9,19 - I guess that would be the clue to figure out how he has applied the "none seek God, none do good, none are righteous" quotes in between as validation. It seems to me that the people referred to in Rom 3:9 and Rom 3:19 include every single man in the flesh. Hence it seems conducive in context to assume that Rom 3:10-18 too refer to these same people ie every single man in the flesh.

On the other hand, does it seem to make sense to talk about every single man in the flesh, then suddenly quote Scripture to refer to a specific group who are atheists and then come back and conclude from such Scripture about every single man's state?


Of course, no one denies this. Total depravity never claims that people are the worst they could be - it just says that every single act of the unregenerate is stained with some form of transgression of God's Law - and since transgression of His law is sin, we say that man in the flesh can do nothing but sin and hence we term such a one, a "sinner".

Take the example of an unbeliever - and given the choice to murder a person, this unbeliever walks away choosing not to murder. Has this person been the worst he/she can be - No. But has the person done good in choosing not to murder - we have to explore the secret thoughts and intents of this person to determine if this act was good or not. If the intent was out of a sense of self-righteousness, then this act still amounts to sin before God. This is very similar to the scenario in Matt 6:2. Can you get what I'm saying?

Without the love of God being shed abroad in our hearts, it's impossible to love as God wills and commands us to - and hence the unregenerate simply can never obey these commandments of God, therein being under sin until God regenerates them.

Why do you have a problem accepting that the flesh can never obey God's law and that it can only serve the law of sin?

And as you said earlier, man is under the power of sin before spiritual regeneration. What does such power of sin actually entail - can it be overcome by man in the flesh or does overcoming its power require a regenerated nature?

I've followed quite closely your and fransisdesales conversation on this exact topic on another thread. As I said there you were coming closer to agreement than you may have realized. I have no problem with accepting that the flesh cannot obey God. Man is more than the flesh. He is body, mind and spirit. The flesh relates to deeds. As Paul said, with his mind his desire is to please God, but the flesh is weak. That relates to the unregenerate as well as to the first saved. The problem is that even one sin undoes all the good a man can do...thus our need for a Saviour.

You stated, "It just says that every single act of the unregenerate is stained with some form of transgression of God's Law -". I would disagree with that. All men have a conscience given by God that, if obeyed, produces acts acceptable to God. Until that conscience has been seared to the point of being gone, man is capable of doing good.

Even one sin, though, requires our need for a Saviour.

Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth.

 

[ivdavid]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Man is more than the flesh. He is body, mind and spirit.

As I stated in the other thread, I guess if we could all concur on a single definition of the flesh in this context, most differences would be resolved.

You make it seem as if the mind operates apart from the flesh - but the flesh is the very nature of man, a part of which we call, the mind. That's how there is the distinction between the "mind of the flesh"(Col 2:18) in the unregenerate and "the mind of Christ"(1 Cor 2:16) in the regenerate.

And the unregenerate are spiritually dead and not "in the spirit" but "in the flesh" (Rom 8:9) - this affirms their usage as natures of man.

As Paul said, with his mind his desire is to please God, but the flesh is weak.

Yes, that mind being the mind of Christ, implying he was regenerated at the time of experiencing this.

Paul describes of himself as being deceived by sin in Rom 7:11. A man being deceived cannot be aware of the deception - he must be spiritually awakened by the Spirit to recognize sin in him and its sinfulness.

I'm just stating this so you know where I come from - not necessarily as argument.

You stated, "It just says that every single act of the unregenerate is stained with some form of transgression of God's Law -". I would disagree with that. All men have a conscience given by God that, if obeyed, produces acts acceptable to God.

See, I gain no pleasure in stating that man is depraved - because in that, I am calling myself depraved - and obviously, it's not something to rejoice in itself. The only reason I hold on to this is because I can honestly claim no good in the flesh - and in the flesh I was, until I was regenerated and born in the spirit. And in the spirit, I see God working out all good in me - mortifying the works of my flesh. In this, I see all glory unto God and none to my flesh.


And regarding Eze 33:12, the theme is seen in v.17. God here is revealing His ways of justice - and all these are true. This does not necessarily imply that this is what's realised in practice. My saying "I will build a hospital if I get $100mn" does not in any way imply that I will get $100mn and hence the building of the hospital is not practically realised. Similarly God speaks truth in saying He will acquit the wicked if they will seek Him - though this does not imply that any seek Him. Which is why He established the new covenant - where He regenerates them of His own initiative and causes them to walk in His ways.

Also, are you considering Rom 3 and Matt 6:2 in light of what I stated?

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

As I stated in the other thread, I guess if we could all concur on a single definition of the flesh in this context, most differences would be resolved.

You make it seem as if the mind operates apart from the flesh - but the flesh is the very nature of man, a part of which we call, the mind. That's how there is the distinction between the "mind of the flesh"(Col 2:18) in the unregenerate and "the mind of Christ"(1 Cor 2:16) in the regenerate.

And the unregenerate are spiritually dead and not "in the spirit" but "in the flesh" (Rom 8:9) - this affirms their usage as natures of man.


Yes, that mind being the mind of Christ, implying he was regenerated at the time of experiencing this.

Paul describes of himself as being deceived by sin in Rom 7:11. A man being deceived cannot be aware of the deception - he must be spiritually awakened by the Spirit to recognize sin in him and its sinfulness.

I'm just stating this so you know where I come from - not necessarily as argument.


See, I gain no pleasure in stating that man is depraved - because in that, I am calling myself depraved - and obviously, it's not something to rejoice in itself. The only reason I hold on to this is because I can honestly claim no good in the flesh - and in the flesh I was, until I was regenerated and born in the spirit. And in the spirit, I see God working out all good in me - mortifying the works of my flesh. In this, I see all glory unto God and none to my flesh.


And regarding Eze 33:12, the theme is seen in v.17. God here is revealing His ways of justice - and all these are true. This does not necessarily imply that this is what's realised in practice. My saying "I will build a hospital if I get $100mn" does not in any way imply that I will get $100mn and hence the building of the hospital is not practically realised. Similarly God speaks truth in saying He will acquit the wicked if they will seek Him - though this does not imply that any seek Him. Which is why He established the new covenant - where He regenerates them of His own initiative and causes them to walk in His ways.

Also, are you considering Rom 3 and Matt 6:2 in light of what I stated?

I'm sorry, but I find it too complicated to address each of your points in this format. Perhaps shorter posts and one thing at a time would work better for me. I'm old, so if you could keep it simple I'd appreciate it.

Just looking at Romans 7, though, I will have to disagree. Paul was addressing the Jews and the law and how he knew what they were going through because he had been there himself. He could not be talking about the regenerated man or he would not be saying we were still carnal instead of spiritual. As far as the flesh goes, it's used in different way depending on it's context. I'd agree with you there that it can be confusing.

Notice the word carnal in these verses, and I think you'll see Paul was not speaking of himself as a believer, but as a Jew under the law.

Romans 7:14 - For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Romans 8:6 - For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Romans 8:7 - Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

 

[ivdavid]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Paul was addressing the Jews and the law and how he knew what they were going through because he had been there himself.

I'd say Paul wasn't addressing some current issue in the churches at Rome in Romans 7 - he was building up his systematic theology towards Romans 8 - where he concludes that those in the flesh are led to death while those in the spirit are led to life. And Romans 7 is where he continues(after Romans 6) to dispel the theological oppositions to his Gospel of grace in Romans 5.

His tone is one of argument, perhaps the greek philosopher style - and hence even the progression of events in time are all lumped together in the present tense itself.

Rom 7:22 talks about his delighting in God's law after the inward man - which happens to be renewed only at regeneration.

Rom 7:25 talks about his serving God's law in the mind - which has to refer to the mind of Christ and not the mind of the flesh, implying regeneration again.

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

I'd say Paul wasn't addressing some current issue in the churches at Rome in Romans 7 - he was building up his systematic theology towards Romans 8 - where he concludes that those in the flesh are led to death while those in the spirit are led to life. And Romans 7 is where he continues(after Romans 6) to dispel the theological oppositions to his Gospel of grace in Romans 5.

His tone is one of argument, perhaps the greek philosopher style - and hence even the progression of events in time are all lumped together in the present tense itself.

Rom 7:22 talks about his delighting in God's law after the inward man - which happens to be renewed only at regeneration.

Rom 7:25 talks about his serving God's law in the mind - which has to refer to the mind of Christ and not the mind of the flesh, implying regeneration again.

I think you're missing the message in Chapter 7. He's speaking to the Jews, who although they delight in the law are unable to obey it because of the law of sin and death. In this law we see the law of sin in his members warring against the law of "my mind". We see "captivity" and "wretched man". We also see..."with the mind I MYSELF served the law of God..."

I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

This is where Paul moves on to the believers...."there is NOW no condemnation"....FREE from the law of sin and death. In chapter 7 you have Paul saying he's carnal and then here to be carnally minded is death.

1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

 

[ivdavid]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

We see "captivity" and "wretched man".

I know. I did respond -
ivdavid - "he[Paul] was building up his systematic theology towards Romans 8...His tone is one of argument, perhaps the greek philosopher style - and hence even the progression of events in time are all lumped together in the present tense itself."

We also see..."with the mind I MYSELF served the law of God..."

Not "served" but "serve" - Present tense. Would you then say that Paul was still under the law at the time of preaching to the jews?
Anyway, the law of God is not meant in negative light in this verse - it's contrasted against the law of sin.

See, Paul takes a lot of effort to establish that the law cannot be served in the flesh. That does not mean the law need not be served. Love is the fulfillment of the law - and this, we are able to do with the "mind of Christ" and hence we in the spirit are now enabled to serve the Law of God.

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

I know. I did respond -
ivdavid - "he[Paul] was building up his systematic theology towards Romans 8...His tone is one of argument, perhaps the greek philosopher style - and hence even the progression of events in time are all lumped together in the present tense itself."


Not "served" but "serve" - Present tense. Would you then say that Paul was still under the law at the time of preaching to the jews?
Anyway, the law of God is not meant in negative light in this verse - it's contrasted against the law of sin.

See, Paul takes a lot of effort to establish that the law cannot be served in the flesh. That does not mean the law need not be served. Love is the fulfillment of the law - and this, we are able to do with the "mind of Christ" and hence we in the spirit are now enabled to serve the Law of God.

Paul is speaking as one of the Jews...those still under the law. Those still serving the law (law of Moses).
As you say, his tone is one of argument, therefore since he himself was in like circumstance before he was saved, he is speaking as one of them. This would include being under the law of sin and death. He is about to explain how it is for those who go on....no longer a wretched man, but a saved one. One who is no longer under the law of sin and death.

 

[mythunderstood]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Reba, John 3:16 states that, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." That tells is there that humanity was worth something to God, to the extent that He sent His Son to die for ALL the sins of everyone who ever lived. We must not forget that.

Jesus only died for the believers. His sacrifice did not cover the sin of unbelief.

 

[glorydaz]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Jesus only died for the believers. His sacrifice did not cover the sin of unbelief.

I must disagree. Jesus died for all sin for all time. All Sin was dealt with on the cross.

Unbelief is the cause for the unsaved not having eternal life.

Not having eternal life is the reason they are condemned.

The cross deals with man's sin, the resurrection brings life to those who believe in Christ.
The prison doors have been opened, belief is when we walk out and are born again from above.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

BEcause of His love. It's 100% a reflection on His pure, lovingkindness and in no way a reflection of our being worthy.

The Bible spells it out very clearly as I've already shown.

The Bible says (Romans 5: 7) For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. And yet God sent His Son to pay the price for a world of lost sinners, whom He loved so much. So the next "logical" step to take, would be that, He (God) thought mankind worthy of forgiveness, mercy, righteousness, the sacrifice of His Son, the ability for man to spend eternity with Him, etc. If He saw no worth at all to man, than why would He go to these extents to save us ? You say because of His Love, but, love sees worth in the object of it's interest. You'd have to explain on a "deeper" level than to just say, God"loved" so He did...Luke 13:34 states, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Here Christ was speaking only about the Jews but, He laments that they would "choose" against Him. Does that sound like a God that sees no worth in the object of His deepest interest?

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Scripture request for man's worth.

Brilliant Scripture usage...

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

Jesus only died for the believers. His sacrifice did not cover the sin of unbelief.

All sins were covered, but, God's provision of forgiveness and mercy will not be accepted by ALL...

 

[savedbygrace57]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

As a Calvinist, do you take into consideration (when witnessing to an unsaved world) that the person may or may not be the chosen elect ? Do you tell that person they must be of the elect to be saved ? If you don't, why not, what would be the harm ?

When Peaching the Gospel,it is not about telling anyone what or who they are, it is about telling them about Christ and Him crucified. It is about what He has done and for whom He has done it for. The elect will believe, the non elect will not believe, simple as that.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Re: When a Calvinist tells the unsaved about Christ, does he consider if they are ele

When Peaching the Gospel,it is not about telling anyone what or who they are, it is about telling them about Christ and Him crucified. It is about what He has done and for whom He has done it for. The elect will believe, the non elect will not believe, simple as that.

If it's part of your belief system, then why not tell the person your witnessing to, that God only choose certain people to be saved and the other's are to be damned. From your viewpoint it wouldn't hurt anything to speak the truth of the matter. Because they will either believe or not...According to election... After all it does play a big part in your doctrine...