• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

What is the Calvinistic interpretation of salvation in Luke 8:12?

HELLO,

I have a new question and I have not found an answer so I ask you for help.

The question is from an Arminian perspective and I have difficulty defending my Calvinistic interpretation of salvation in LUKE 8:12:

If un-regenerated men are utterly, totally, and completely unable to respond to the gospel presented in any fashion until first being born-again, then why would Satan steal the word from their heart to prevent them from believing and being saved (like Jesus said) if they are totally unable to do so?

Why does Satan steal the word?? Jesus' answer - "so that they may not believe and be saved." After all, why steal the Word from a dead man? He is dead, he has no ability to respond to the gospel whatsoever!! It seems He is teaching that man has that ability and it is EXACTLY why Satan steals to the word - to prevent him from believing and being saved!

This seems also to refute Irresistible Grace because Jesus is teaching that by Satan stealing the word out of a person's heart he can prevent them from being saved. If Satan can prevent someone from being saved God's grace is not irresistible!

If Satan did not steal the word would any more people be saved than otherwise? After all, Jesus said it was to prevent men from believing and being saved. So if he did not steal the word, would any more men believe and be saved? If not, then what did he prevent? If not, then again I ask, Why does he steal the word?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP

-----

Response:

Thank you for reaching out with such a thought-provoking question. It is crucial for us to engage with Scripture and grapple with the implications of our theological convictions. In your question, you raise a significant issue regarding the Calvinistic interpretation of salvation in Luke 8:12 and the interplay between the roles of Satan, the unregenerate person, and God's grace in the process of salvation.

You rightly point out that the passage suggests Satan steals the word from people's hearts to prevent them from believing and being saved. This seems to imply that there is a potential for belief and salvation, which may appear, on the surface, to challenge the Calvinist doctrines of Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace. However, it is essential to remember that Calvinism does not teach that God saves people in a vacuum or apart from the means of grace, which is the proclamation of the Gospel.

The Calvinist understanding of the parable of the sower, as found in Luke 8:12, is that the seed represents the Word of God, and the various types of soil symbolize the different responses of human hearts to the Gospel. In the case of the seed falling on the path, Satan snatches away the word, preventing any belief or salvation from occurring.

While it is true that Calvinism teaches the total moral inability of the unregenerate person, who is hostile to Christ and unable to believe the Gospel, it does not negate the importance of the Gospel message itself. The presence of the Gospel is a necessary condition for the Holy Spirit to work in the heart of the unregenerate person. This is in line with Romans 10:17, which states that "faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." The Holy Spirit must germinate the seed of the Word of God in the heart of the person, enabling them to believe and be saved.

In this context, Satan's actions to steal the Word make sense. By removing the seed of the Word, he aims to hinder the work of the Holy Spirit and thwart the growth of faith that could result from the presence of the Gospel. Thus, Satan's actions do not contradict the Calvinist understanding of salvation; rather, they underscore the importance of the Gospel message as a necessary condition for the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the unregenerate person.

If I were to use an illustration, their argument seems to go along the following lines: imagine a farmer who sows his seed in the hope of a harvest, but an enemy comes along and steals the seed. Why does the crop not grow anyway? It rained so there still should have been a crop. Obviously because the rain requires the seed for it to actually grow. It does not produce a crop without it.

To bring this to the illustration into the bible inquiry that was brought up, it is like saying, if the seed of the word is snatched away, why doesn't the crop grow anyway. In the Calvinist interpretation (the critic reasons) the Holy Spirit can bring someone to faith anyway apart from the word. But this is not what Calvinists believe. God does not save people in a vacuum or apart from the word of God but through the preaching of the gospel. If the word is missing then we believe a person is inhibited from coming to faith. The Holy Spirit must germinate that gospel seed if there is to be life. Just because the passage in question does directly not talk about about the Holy Spirit does not mean that He is not necessary. This leads me to believe that the person asking the question is probably not an actual classic Arminian since people with that theological conviction also affirm the necessity of the Holy Spirit in salvation. It sounds more like a Semi-Pelagian or perhaps an Provisionalist.

The fact that Satan can attempt to hinder the work of the Gospel does not refute the doctrine of Irresistible Grace. Irresistible Grace teaches that when the Holy Spirit effectively calls someone to salvation through the gospel, the person will inevitably come to faith in Christ. The power of God's grace is irresistible, but the means of grace, the proclamation of the Gospel, can be hindered by Satan's efforts.

As an aside, this type of unaided reasoning is reminiscent of non-Reformed individuals who assert that God's commands in Scripture indicate that people must therefore possess the moral ability to obey them. However, as Romans 3:19-20 illustrates, it does not follow that a command inherently demonstrates ability (through the law we become conscious of sin), nor does it alleviate our responsibility any more than someone who cannot repay their debt is absolved of responsibility. In the case of Luke 8:12, the same principle applies. The mere fact that a seed is snatched away does not imply that a person can come to faith apart from the Word. There is a crucial element missing from their analysis: the Word and the Spirit work together. This underscores the importance of embracing the whole counsel of Scripture, rather than developing an entire doctrine based on an isolated text and drawing conclusions from unaided reasoning powers.

Lastly this highlights the importance of prayer. The spiritual battle surrounding the proclamation of the Gospel, as evidenced by Satan's efforts to snatch away the Word, underscores the importance of prayer in evangelism. Believers are called to pray for the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of those who hear the Gospel, asking God to overcome any hindrances and bring about faith and repentance.

In conclusion, the Calvinistic interpretation of salvation in Luke 8:12 acknowledges the significance of the Gospel message as a necessary condition for the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the unregenerate person. Satan's actions to steal the Word serve to emphasize the importance of the Gospel and do not contradict the doctrines of Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace. Instead, they highlight the ongoing spiritual battle that surrounds the proclamation of the Gospel and the necessity of God's sovereign grace in bringing about the salvation of His elect.

I hope this answer provides you with a better understanding of the Calvinistic perspective on this passage and how it relates to the broader Reformed theological tradition. May you continue to search the Scriptures diligently and grow in your understanding of God's sovereign grace and love.
 
Only when the author of the power to freely choose is likewise the author of the choice.
God is the author of the power to choose.
The choice is on you.
Sorry, you can't blame God for your free choices.
Oh I agree.

hence God is not the cause of sin. or the author of it
Keeping in mind that Biblical free will is the power to choose what one prefers.
This is to pointed a definition. I disagree..
If one prefers it, regardless of how that occurs, it is free will when one chooses it.
Your basic understanding/definition of "free will" limps a little, not being in accordance with what we see operating in Scripture.

Sorry you don't believe Jn 3:3-8, Eph 2:1.
I do believe John 3: 3 - 8, I also believe in John 3: 10 - 19

eph 2: 1 continue to eph 2: 8 you can not take eph 1 apart from verse 8.
Keeping in mind that faith is a gift (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3), no gift = no faith.
Yes it is. If God did not die for me and offer me the gift of salvation. I would never have anything to trust.

There is also a spiritual gift of faith.. but in context it does not relate here. it is for those who are born of the spirit
Then your definition of free is not in accordance with what we see operating in Scripture.

Sorry you don't believe Jn 3:3-8, Eph 2:1.
repeating the same notion does not make you any more right.

I agree with both passages in context..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh I agree.
hence God is not the cause of sin. or the author of it
This is to pointed a definition. I disagree..
Feel free to show its inadequacies.
I do believe John 3: 3 - 8, I also believe in John 3: 10 - 19

eph 2: 1 continue to eph 2: 8 you can not take eph 1 apart from verse 8.
Relevance?
Yes it is. If God did not die for me and offer me the gift of salvation. I would never have anything to trust.

There is also a spiritual gift of faith.. but in context it does not relate here. it is for those who are born of the spirit
That is the only true faith, there is no other faith apart from the Holy Spirit. . .we cannot even see the kingdom of God, much less believe in it, apart from the sovereign (as unaccountable as the wind, Jn 3:6-8) rebirth of the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5).
repeating the same notion does not make you any more right.
I agree with both passages in context.
Feel free to explain the context and your understanding in that light.
 
I will make a quick one. But it will be tomorrow probably before I will respond.. it is almost my bedtime (in ohio) lol. Need to relax

I forgot to send this last night, forgive me, I did make a thread
No worries.

I live a half hour south of Cleveland, howdy neighbor.
 
Feel free to show its inadequacies.

Relevance?
relevence?

So you think it is ok to take a passage out of context. and just interpret it any way we want?


That is the only true faith, there is no other faith apart from the Holy Spirit. . .we cannot even see the kingdom of God, much less believe in it, apart from the sovereign (as unaccountable as the wind, Jn 3:6-8) rebirth of the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5).
Nicodemus asked Jesus, how can the things in john 3 - 8 be,

Jesus was amazed. that he a teacher of the law. did not understand so Jesus told him HOW those things take place.

9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”

10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? 11 Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. 12 f I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

again, you can not take words out of context you must take the whole.

how is one born again (as apposed to what is being born again in vs 3 - 8)

1. Jesus uses the OT scene of moses and the serpent. anyone who knows this story knows everyone was dead. They needed rescued. So God prepared a way for everyone. those who looked in faith lived, those who did not because they did nto believe comntinued to die and eventually died.
2. In the same token, jesus must be lifted up. so again, whoever looks in faith will not perish, but have eternal life
3. Jesus was not sent to condemn THE WORLD. but that the world MAY BE SAVED.
4. Whoever believes is not condemned.
5. Whoever remains in unbelief remains condemned and will suffer their death

Feel free to explain the context and your understanding in that light.
see above for John 3

as for eph 2

2 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,

1. I was dead because of my personal sins.
2. I was made alive (now we must ask why or how)


2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

3. the reason we were dead in tresspasses and sin


4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),

4. the means by which we were made alive. By Grace, we have been saved, or made alive

6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

5. Again, He raised us up.
6. he did this so in the ages to come he might show everyone the exceeding riches of his grace (again, by grace we have been saved)


8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

7. Again, the how. how are we saved by grace? THROUGH FAITH, You can not remove faith from grace they go hand in hand.
8. Our faith is not a work. we do not save ourselves by faith. he saved us and makes us alive through faith by grace .
 
Eleanor said:
Keeping in mind that Biblical free will is the power to choose what one prefers.
This is to pointed a definition. I disagree..
How does that differ from how you define it? You say that 'freewill' is "the ability to chose what you want", no?
 
Eleanor said:
Keeping in mind that Biblical free will is the power to choose what one prefers.

How does that differ from how you define it? You say that 'freewill' is "the ability to chose what you want", no?
No

it is the ability to chose between 2 or more options.

we do not always chose what we want.
 
No

it is the ability to chose between 2 or more options.

we do not always chose what we want.
You did give the definition at one point, that it is the ability to choose what one wants.

Nevertheless, we do always choose what we most want at that moment of choosing. Call it "prefer", if you like —we're not talking about what you feel like, but what you most want at that moment. Could be that what you most want at that moment is to do what is right, in spite of your feelings; or to do wrong, in spite of knowing better.

But, the other question— choosing between two or more options. Do you consider both options to actually be possibilities? Do you have any evidence of that?
 
No

it is the ability to chose between 2 or more options.

we do not always chose what we want.
Is God sovereign in what option you choose ? In other words, you will ultimately chose whatever God had predetermined for you to choose beforehand ?
 
Back
Top