The heresy that I find inherent in Calvinism

[justbyfaith]

The real doctrine says that the elect will come to Christ in faith----no matter what they think about it.

And the real doctrine teaches that no one will come to Christ unless they are among His elect, and that Christ will not cast out any who come to Him (or as it says in John 6, He won't cast out any who God has given Him)

That would indicate that I can now look back on my receiving of Jesus as Lord and Saviour as being the catalyst and reason why I am in the kingdom today.

Some Calvinists have a contention with such doctrine and it is to them that I bring this argument.

John 6:37 clearly teaches us that Jesus will in no wise cast out anyone who comes to Him.

So, I believe that we have established that it is a false (although logical) conclusion of such doctrines as Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement that "I may be of the non-elect; and if this be the case, there is no redemption for me."

I'm glad that we have established this.

 

[TMSO]

It appears to me that in Calvinism there is a very deep-rooted problem that amounts to heresy and I believe that it needs to be addressed.

And that is that the doctrine proclaims that a person is regenerated before they can come to Christ.

I will only say that if this is the case, then coming to Christ isn't necessary; since regeneration happens before it (and thus apart from it).

This is an abject heresy of Calvinism that must needs be corrected within its own framework of theology and doctrine.

This is an issue I faced for some time. The last hold out before everything snapped in place. How could regeneration precede faith? I fought with that for some time. Then one day, it just snapped into place, and it all made sense. I considered the idea abhorrent, and then one day, I just understood it. It isn't the easiest thing to explain though, which may explain why it took so much time for me to get it. A part of it is terminology. You have to understand what is meant by "regeneration". If you can come to understand what that means in relation to salvation, that may help you to understand it better.

 

[Mr GLee]

Once again another Cal precept has been screwed up, misrepresented and a straw man argued. Limited Atonement is the concept the atonement is applied only to the elect. This is an easy mistake to make and one that frequently occurs. The matter has been clarified in history to say Christ's atonement is sufficient for all but efficient or efficacious only for those God actually saves. In other words, the power of the atonement is inexhaustible, or "unlimited" but its application is finite because God does not apply that power to everyone. He has, in His wisdom, purview and purvey, according to His will and purpose and His alone, chosen, selected, or elected who He will save and He applies the atonement accordingly.

Synergists believe the same thing. The only difference is the predicate the application on the sinner's fleshly will and not God's divine will.

Amen I would ask .Why does some of mankind teach God cannot elect (make a choice) as if we elected to move Him according to our mind?

Job 23:12 Neither have I gone back from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food.But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth. For he performeth the thing that is appointed for me: and many such things are with him. Therefore am I troubled at his presence: when I consider, I am afraid of him.For God maketh my heart soft, and the Almighty troubleth me
.
Ask oneself who is making your heart soft ?????.
I don't think dying mankind has any power to turn Him

A companion parable to the one in Job 23 above.God doing all the work or he does nothing . Jesus did the will of the Father with delight. Jonah the murrumer kicked against the pricks (the letter of the law death) Just as Saul before his conversion as Paul and Jonah desired to die rather than see the salvation of 3000 (faithless, no faith as it is written ) that had no idea of the power of word

Philippians 2:13-13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

The key both to reveal and empower dying mankind to perform it to His glory . We would never glory in the dying powerless flesh

Acts 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us

 

[Mr GLee]

That would indicate that I can now look back on my receiving of Jesus as Lord and Saviour as being the catalyst and reason why I am in the kingdom today.

Some Calvinists have a contention with such doctrine and it is to them that I bring this argument.

John 6:37 clearly teaches us that Jesus will in no wise cast out anyone who comes to Him.

So, I believe that we have established that it is a false (although logical) conclusion of such doctrines as Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement that "I may be of the non-elect; and if this be the case, there is no redemption for me."

I'm glad that we have established this.

I think we can look back at the power he gave to us in order to believe and do the good pleasure of His eternal living word or will .

As long as we awake on the green side of the grass there is a living hope.beyond the grave.

John 6: 7 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.

All those (as many as (not one more or less. )They are the ones that are reckoned as having no power of themselves to raise themselves to new born again life or cast out lying spirits .

The Father in no wise will not cast out. Not Jesus the Son man he has no power of his own to cast out or draw dying mankind into fellowship with the Holy Father .

The key as many as .Not one more or one less. God is not a man

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:. . . (.Power)

 

[Arial]

I do not see Jesus as contradicting Himself anywhere within this entire passage.

Well, that is bound to be the answer when one doesn't bother to read it. But I have quoted the same entire set of passages to you before, underlined or put in red those specific contradictions, gone over them for your, showed you where it contradicted other scriptures in other places, and still you can't see it. That is selective willful blindness, or a refusal to even read the passages.

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

Well, that is bound to be the answer when one doesn't bother to read it. But I have quoted the same entire set of passages to you before, underlined or put in red those specific contradictions, gone over them for your, showed you where it contradicted other scriptures in other places, and still you can't see it. That is selective willful blindness, or a refusal to even read the passages.

We all seem to have blinders when it comes to our preferred biases of interpretation. I see free will passages AND non-free will passages both in scripture. It does seem odd to me, though, when people refuse to see something that is staring them in the face.

 

[Arial]

We all seem to have blinders when it comes to our preferred biases of interpretation. I see free will passages AND non-free will passages both in scripture. It does seem odd to me, though, when people refuse to see something that is staring them in the face.

A person certainly can see both free will and non-free will passages in the Bible but if there actually were both, when it comes to the "process" of salvation, then the Bible would be contradicting itself.

So, in a discussion, one first has to specifically define what they mean by free will, and how or if it relates to salvation. That is usually the issue being supported or denied by these passages that are used as claiming choice in belief. And as I and others have illustrated (and I don't know if you read any of them) when John 6:37 is isolated from the entire context of the conversation Jesus is having, and said to mean what @justbyfaith says it means, it is a direct contradiction to what Jesus said. And this he ignores by claiming not to see it.

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

A person certainly can see both free will and non-free will passages in the Bible but if there actually were both, when it comes to the "process" of salvation, then the Bible would be contradicting itself.

So, in a discussion, one first has to specifically define what they mean by free will, and how or if it relates to salvation. That is usually the issue being supported or denied by these passages that are used as claiming choice in belief. And as I and others have illustrated (and I don't know if you read any of them) when John 6:37 is isolated from the entire context of the conversation Jesus is having, and said to mean what @justbyfaith says it means, it is a direct contradiction to what Jesus said. And this he ignores by claiming not to see it.

If you assumption begins with the presumption that salvation itself, or being "born again" determines whether we have free will or not, then there is no way to get through to you that we are not talking about that at all. We are talking about unsaved and saved people having free will, period. If they don't at all, in any way, have free will, your conclusion seems obvious.

But not everything about being a Christian is about the new birth spiritually. You have to move on from that to maturity in the faith. This idea that focussing on whether a person is actually saved or not is not productive of any type of debate at all, since it requires some kind of supernatural knowledge of other people to be able to make that judgment to begin with, and that is implausible.

 

[Arial]

If you assumption begins with the presumption that salvation itself, or being "born again" determines whether we have free will or not, then there is no way to get through to you that we are not talking about that at all. We are talking about unsaved and saved people having free will, period. If they don't at all, in any way, have free will, your conclusion seems obvious.

When someone starts talking to be about free will I need to know what they mean. I don't decide what they mean by what I mean so that is a straw man. There are differing views on free will. Some have said that when Calvinism says the will is not free they mean man has no will at all. And that is not what it means at all.

Then there is libertarian free will which states that our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. It says that is the only way for there to be moral responsibility. In essence this form of free will says it is the freedom to act contrary to one's nature, predisposition and greatest desires.

The compatibilist on the other hand believes that free will is compatible with determinism (the sovereignty of God). Man freely chooses what God has determined that he will choose and man is therefore responsible for his choices. Mans choices are affected by human nature and and he cannot choose contrary to his nature and desires. Thus man as a free moral agent who freely makes choices. He cannot choose contrary to his fallen nature and cannot discern spiritual things or turn to God in faith apart from divine intervention.

I hold to this latter view because I find it consistent with what we read of God in the Bible and what we read of mankind in the Bible, but that has nothing to do with what I am or am not able to understand about what the other person is talking about. Again you say, "If they don't at all have free will, your conclusion seems obvious." Here you do not say what you (or anyone else, the anyone else is presumed by you and also it is presumed that all are viewing free will in the same way)mean by free will and you are also presuming what my view is as well as what my conclusion is. Even though I have given no conclusion to anything.

But not everything about being a Christian is about the new birth spiritually. You have to move on from that to maturity in the faith.

However that is not the subject of the thread or even the subject of the exchange between you and me.

This idea that focussing on whether a person is actually saved or not is not productive of any type of debate at all, since it requires some kind of supernatural knowledge of other people to be able to make that judgment to begin with, and that is implausible.

Who is focusing on whether a person is saved or not? Are you? This is totally unrelated to the post it responds to when if you were going to respond to my post, which was a response to your post, one would think the correct thing to do would be to address what was written rather than go off in a completely unrelated direction.

 

[ReverendRV]

When someone starts talking to be about free will I need to know what they mean.

They are talking about Contra Causal Libertarian Free Will, regarding how their Will as a Secondary Causation is Free from God's Will as a Primary Causation; resulting in their Will being a Primary Causation; just like God's Will...

 

[makesends]

That would indicate that I can now look back on my receiving of Jesus as Lord and Saviour as being the catalyst and reason why I am in the kingdom today.

Some Calvinists have a contention with such doctrine and it is to them that I bring this argument.

John 6:37 clearly teaches us that Jesus will in no wise cast out anyone who comes to Him.

So, I believe that we have established that it is a false (although logical) conclusion of such doctrines as Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement that "I may be of the non-elect; and if this be the case, there is no redemption for me."

I'm glad that we have established this.

Haha! We have?

"We" who?

 

[Arial]

They are talking about Contra Causal Libertarian Free Will, regarding how their Will as a Secondary Causation is Free from God's Will as a Primary Causation; resulting in their Will being a Primary Causation; just like God's Will...

Everyone?

 

[ReverendRV]

Everyone?

They don't realize it, but it's what CC Free Will results in...

They make themselves God...

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, that is bound to be the answer when one doesn't bother to read it. But I have quoted the same entire set of passages to you before, underlined or put in red those specific contradictions, gone over them for your, showed you where it contradicted other scriptures in other places, and still you can't see it. That is selective willful blindness, or a refusal to even read the passages.

You may have quoted the scriptures in question but you have not put to me words declaring how those scriptures contradict themselves in light of my theology. Sorry, I just don't see the contradictions. You are going to have to set them forth more clearly.

 

[justbyfaith]

We all seem to have blinders when it comes to our preferred biases of interpretation. I see free will passages AND non-free will passages both in scripture. It does seem odd to me, though, when people refuse to see something that is staring them in the face.

It is not a matter of refusing. If someone can show it to me more clearly, I would be glad to "see" it.

 

[justbyfaith]

And as I and others have illustrated (and I don't know if you read any of them) when John 6:37 is isolated from the entire context of the conversation Jesus is having, and said to mean what @justbyfaith says it means, it is a direct contradiction to what Jesus said. And this he ignores by claiming not to see it.

Feel free to show it to me.

 

[justbyfaith]

When someone starts talking to be about free will I need to know what they mean.

I would say that it means that when a person is drawn to Christ, he is enabled to either receive or reject Christ.

Apart from the Spirit of the Lord, he does not have the ability to make that choice.

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom (2 Corinthians 3:17).

 

[justbyfaith]

Haha! We have?

"We" who?

If it is not established, then I assume you have a logical contention with what I am saying.

You need to go ahead and present that if we are going to continue this conversation.

 

[ReverendRV]

I would say that it means that when a person is drawn to Christ, he is enabled to either receive or reject Christ.

Apart from the Spirit of the Lord, he does not have the ability to make that choice.

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom (2 Corinthians 3:17).

A Freed Will?

 

[justbyfaith]

A Freed Will?

yes...I don't see that as being outside the lines of biblical teaching.