The god of Calvinism's arbitrary decision.

[justbyfaith]

No, they were rejected before they had even done anything good or bad, according to Romans 9:11. They are condemned because of their sin.

If they are condemned because of their sin, then they are rejected for doing bad.

 

[justbyfaith]

If that's all you disagree with Calvinism about, you don't disagree with Calvinism, because Romans 10:9-13 doesn't disagree with Calvinism.

You appear to be telling me that in Calvinism, faith precedes grace.

That is not what I am hearing from some of you.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, it isn't a good hermeneutic that interprets scripture and builds doctrine on one's notion of love, instead of on what the Bible says.

The Bible teaches us a true notion of love, in 2 Peter 3:9.

 

[justbyfaith]

Calvinism doesn't differ from Romans 10:9-13. It's all true.

So, Calvinism teaches that there is something that we can do in order to obtain salvation?

That is not what I hear from the majority of Calvinists.

Are you certain that you, yourself, are a Calvinist?

 

[makesends]

If they are condemned because of their sin, then they are rejected for doing bad.

You are talking about Election, remember? We aren't discussing the results of their election. You asked why they were rejected rather than elected to salvation. They are not rejected because of their sin. If they were, none of us would be elected.

 

[makesends]

You appear to be telling me that in Calvinism, faith precedes grace.

That is not what I am hearing from some of you.

Hardly! Grace is how we are given faith.

 

[makesends]

Are you certain that you, yourself, are a Calvinist?

Ha! I don't consider myself a Calvinist, though they very closely hold to most of the same things I do. But all sorts of folks tell me I am one. I don't really care.

 

[justbyfaith]

You are talking about Election, remember? We aren't discussing the results of their election. You asked why they were rejected rather than elected to salvation. They are not rejected because of their sin. If they were, none of us would be elected.

So, why are they rejected? Does Calvinism provide an answer?

 

[makesends]

The Bible teaches us a true notion of love, in 2 Peter 3:9.

This is going on and on and on. 2 Peter 3:9 is written to believers, and in this context, concerning believers.

 

[makesends]

The Bible teaches us a true notion of love, in 2 Peter 3:9.

This is going on and on and on. 2 Peter 3:9 is written to believers, and in this context, concerning believers.

So, why are they rejected? Does Calvinism provide an answer?

For the similar reason the Elect are elected: The bible shows, for God's own purposes, both situations. Calvinism is not the point here.

 

[justbyfaith]

Hardly! Grace is how we are given faith.

From the perspective of Romans 10:9-13, we take a step of faith and procure salvation by that step of faith.

Doers Calvinism preach the same?

Or does it preach that one is saved and then takes the step of faith because they have been saved (or else do not need to take the step of faith at all because they are saved without it)?

From my perspective the Bible clearly teaches that there is something that we do in order to procure salvation, in Romans 10:9-13.

But that is not what I hear in Calvinistic teaching.

Also, in Romans 5:2, we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand.

This indicates that we entered in through the door using the key of faith. There was a time when we were not inhabitants of the mansion wherein we now dwell (grace). We entered in (gained access) by entering in through the door using the key to the door.

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[justbyfaith]

This is going on and on and on. 2 Peter 3:9 is written to believers, and in this context, concerning believers.

It is referring to any and all. A God of love doesn't create people with the purpose of frying them for all of eternity.

For the similar reason the Elect are elected: The bible shows, for God's own purposes, both situations. Calvinism is not the point here.

This god that you are proclaiming seems to me to be some kind of cosmic monster; who purposes to predestinate certain people unto everlasting burnings without giving them a choice in the matter of whether they can repent and avoid that fate.

For many Calvinists believe that salvation is based solely on God's sovereign choice and that we do not have a choice in the matter of whether or not we will surrender to Christ and be saved; and that therefore, if I come to Christ but am of the non-elect, He will cast me out; and my fate will be everlasting burnings.

So, what would you do if I told you that I have a word from the Lord that you are not of the elect?

If you considered that word to be true, you would despair; and if you considered that it was even a possibility, you would be uncertain about your salvation even if you took the steps that the Bible teaches us will procure it.

 

[justbyfaith]

Therefore eternal security is not a concept that I can derive from Calvinism.

Yet, what is the boast of Calvinism? That its doctrine provides eternal security for those who believe in it.

 

[justbyfaith]

So, what would you do if I told you that I have a word from the Lord that you are not of the elect?

If you considered that word to be true, you wouldn't even attempt to do what it takes in order to be saved; and if you considered that it was even a possibility, you would never have real assurance even if you did what it takes to be saved.

Nevertheless the scripture declares,

1Th 1:5, For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

 

[justbyfaith]

And what would the result be if you believe yourself to be of the elect?

I think it to be very likely that you would consider yourself to be saved from before the foundations of the world and when faced with the decision to do what it takes to procure salvation, you would very likely reject that salvation because you would believe yourself to be saved (of the elect) apart from doing what it takes to procure salvation.

 

[justbyfaith]

Therefore I believe Calvinism to be a ploy of satan to keep men and women from making a decision to receive, believe in, and follow Christ, thus procuring salvation.

As the devil is the hater of all of us and desires that all of us perish.

 

[justbyfaith]

However, God allowed Calvinism to be a doctrine in the church; because in the debate between Calvinism and the truth there is ample opportunity for the true gospel to be preached with even more power than if we were not defending the faith against a heretical doctrine.

 

[makesends]

From the perspective of Romans 10:9-13, we take a step of faith and procure salvation by that step of faith.

Doers Calvinism preach the same?

It does. Notice that Romans 10:9-13 doesn't say, "...you will become saved as a result." "9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.”[a] 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Remember that the gift of God, salvation, is by grace through faith, and that not of yourself.

I don't make claims about whether or not regeneration occurs simultaneously with confession and repentance and profession of faith. I do claim: Salvific faith comes by the word of God, and is produced by the Spirit of God; and that it is necessary to be changed from death to life (regeneration) in order to submit to God and believe; and that regeneration is by the gift of the Holy Spirit who takes up residence in the person, changing them from death to life; and I claim that it is "logically-'before'", time-sequence irrelevant. But you being bound by temporal, self-deterministic thinking, will not accept that last.

Maybe I should state it in a more sterile manner: "Ye must be born again."

Whatever else you may say, being born again is necessary to salvation. If Salvation is by faith, and by confessing with the mouth, and by believing with the heart, being born again is part and parcel of those things, because they are impossible apart from the Holy Spirit transforming the dead to life.

Or does it preach that one is saved and then takes the step of faith because they have been saved (or else do not need to take the step of faith at all because they are saved without it)?

From my perspective the Bible clearly teaches that there is something that we do in order to procure salvation, in Romans 10:9-13.

Romans 10:9-13 says nothing about taking a step of faith. It only says, 'if you believe'. But, I agree that Romans 10:9-13 gives a reliable if-then statement. If you do these things, then you will be saved. What you have not shown is how we are able to do them, being spiritually dead.

But that is not what I hear in Calvinistic teaching.

You seem to forget that Calvinism does not claim a comprehensive treatise of the Bible. It is, after all, a reaction to falsehood. It vehemently and happily shows scripture disputing that we are saved by what WE do. It is even adamant that we do, we must do, and we will do, once God has regenerated us, but that those are a result of regeneration.

As, I believe, @Josheb showed, Salvation is (at least) a three-fold proposition. We are saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved. We become saved, we continue in our Salvation, we will see our Salvation. Consider that before you decide too quickly just what the salvation is in the verses that you think counter Calvinism. Self-determinism is not a biblical concept.

Also, in Romans 5:2, we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand.

This indicates that we entered in through the door using the key of faith. There was a time when we were not inhabitants of the mansion wherein we now dwell (grace). We entered in (gained access) by entering in through the door using the key to the door.

Thoughts? Comments?

"Key to a door"? That's poetic, I suppose, but that isn't what it says. But, nevertheless, it also says it is through Christ that we have access by faith to God's grace. You need to understand, GRACE is not grace if we attain it by the strength and integrity of our will. Grace by definition is the gift of God, not of man. (Eph 2:8,9) Therefore, the faith is not the work of the self-determining man, but of God.

 

[makesends]

However, God allowed Calvinism to be a doctrine in the church; because in the debate between Calvinism and the truth there is ample opportunity for the true gospel to be preached with even more power than if we were not defending the faith against a heretical doctrine.

Agree! —against a heretical doctrine such as self-determinism in Salvation.

 

[Josheb]

It is not intended as a rag on those who hold the doctrine of Calvinism but as a rag on Calvinism itself.

Then I will depart because I am not interested in having a discussion with anyone who openly rags on anything, especially not in an op rife with logical fallacy, false witness, and an absence of sincere interest in the facts. I'm not a big fan of abusing scripture with proof-texting, either. Because of this open confession of contempt and lack of interest in learning, I encourage everyone to vacate the thread. Everyone, not just the Cals. My synergist brothers in Christ should not collaborate with those openly contemptuous and deceitful any more than should those whose views are being unjustly attacked with falsehoods. It's not okay to side with anyone who does this (Proverbs 18). Note there's not a single Cal here who has said this opening post is correct. It is a gross misrepresentation of Calvinism and as far as I can see every Cal in the thread has been kind and patient in reply, working on your behalf to provide correct information despite the rife falsehood and open contempt.

Reminder: Re-read the forum rules because they require members of the forum to take a conciliatory approach to discussing differences. The forum does not require anyone to subscribe to Calvinist soteriology, but there is an expectation of manners and respect. Deliberate ragging is prohibited, and baiting is an easy way for a member to get him/herself banned or suspended.

Let me know if an openness to learning happens.