Why don't Calvinist believe the Gospel?

[Dave]

Who do you think that Seed is in Gen 3:15?

Jesus. Gal. 3:16 You might want to read the whole chapter to put it into context. It says what I've been saying all along.

 

[Dave]

Yeah, you're gonna have to quote it—because I just re-read the entirety of post #7 and didn't see anywhere an answer to Josh's question. If I have understood that post correctly, you seem to believe that Romans 10:8-11 was written TO believers but ABOUT unbelievers (since it describes what happens at conversion and forms the content of the evangelistic message). That doesn't answer Josh's question, but rather denies its core premise. As a result, the appropriateness question never comes into play; you have dissolved the premise rather than testing it.

Romans 10:9-13that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

And that's the word of faith (Gospel) we preach.

Here, Paul calls it that message the Gospel of peace, and then the Gospel. And faith comes by hearing the Word of God.

14-17 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.
----------------------

John 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

 

[John Bauer]

... And that's the word of faith (Gospel) we preach.

Here, Paul calls it that message the Gospel of peace, and then the Gospel. And faith comes by hearing the Word of God.

It sounds like you're still saying it's written TO believers but ABOUT unbelievers coming to the faith. If that's indeed what you're saying, then this is how you answer Josh's question:

Q: Is it appropriate to take verses written about the saved and regenerate believer and apply them to unsaved, unregenerate, non-believers?

A: I cannot answer your question because I reject the premise on which it's based. I deny that it's about the saved and regenerate believer.

 

[Arial]

Jesus. Gal. 3:16 You might want to read the whole chapter to put it into context. It says what I've been saying all along.

Which is what? You have been making many assertions that the Bible won't support. I gave Gen 3:14-15 as being the gospel instead of Romans 10:8-13, which is not the Gospel but about the Gospel. Instead of addressing that you simply quoted three scriptures.

Are you using them to say that faith comes before regeneration? 1 Cor 15:1-4: Eph 1:13; 1 John 5:13.)

1Cor 15 seems to be addressing the"gospel" issue. And Paul is saying exactly what Jesus was promised to do in Gen 3, and did do. The same with Eph 1:13 and 1 John.

How you are relating Gal 3:16 to the "what the gospel is" I don't know.

You have completely missed the impact and importance of Gen 3:14-15 being the gospel in keeping the plan of redemption unified. But then Dispensatinalists usually do. It would wreck their whole two kingdoms of God theory.

 

[Dave]

Genesis 3:14-15 So the Lord God said to the serpent: "Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life. And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel."

Arial, you understand that the word Gospel means good news, right? Understandably, we want to apply as much context as possible, but you're missing the good news part. In other words, your good news has no good news.

I can point to a verse that explicitly states what I posted. In other words, I presented scripture exactly as it is written, without any embellishment or added interpretation. Ephesians 2:8 explicitly states we are saved by grace. The same verse explicitly states we are saved through faith (not by faith). Verse 10 explicitly states we are created in Christ for good works.

You were asked to do the same = provide a verse that explicitly states "saved by faith." Acts 16:31 should be read so that it is consistent with Ephesians 2:8. Save through faith, not saved by faith.

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

 

[Arial]

Arial, you understand that the word Gospel means good news, right? Understandably, we want to apply as much context as possible, but you're missing the good news part. In other words, your good news has no good news.

I guess we differ on what is good news. I consider the serpents head being crushed by Jesus the best news of all. Do you not realize that is where the historical beginning of the story of redemption is? That is the first place the good news is announced and everything that followed is working towards that end? What it does for the believer, the human element, shows up after Christ's birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension.

 

[Josheb]

Genesis 3:14-15 So the Lord God said to the serpent: "Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life. And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel."

Arial, you understand that the word Gospel means good news, right? Understandably, we want to apply as much context as possible, but you're missing the good news part. In other words, your good news has no good news.



Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Neither passage states "saved by faith." Try answering the question asked again.

 

[Reformedguy]

I was challenged by Josheb to provide one verse that claimed 'believe and be saved'. I've been told by him that Romans 10:9-13 is not the Gospel because it was written to believers. I asked Him to share what he thinks the Gospel is, many times, but he won't. Then there are those who liked the post quoted below. Paul said this Gospel that we preach.

Romans 10:9-13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Here's the quote by Josheb


From post # 65 in the thread "Regeneration and born again are not synonymous", page 4.

Here's some more.

What Does the Bible Say About Believe In The Name Of Jesus And Be Saved?

Bible verses about Believe In The Name Of Jesus And Be Saved

www.openbible.info

Why don't Calvinists believe the Gospel?

What is the gospel? I find this question odd and insulting. Are we to infer no Calvinist is saved?

 

[Josheb]

What is the gospel? I find this question odd and insulting. Are we to infer no Calvinist is saved?

Yes, that inference is being implied. How can a Calvinist be saved if s/he does not believe the gospel?

 

[His clay]

@Dave,

The case you've asserted demonstrates an acceptance of what Flowers teaches HERE:

I have yet to find a Calvinist who is able to show me one thing that the human means actually accomplish that is not sufficiently taken care of by the effectual work of regeneration. In Romans 10:14 when Paul asks the rhetorical question, “How shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard,” the clearly implied answer is that hearing is sufficient for believing. But, according to Calvinism, it is not. If Calvinism were true Paul would have certainly asked, “How shall they believe what they hear unless God regenerates them?”​

Flowers claims Romans 10:14, "clearly implied the answer is that hearing is sufficient for believing." Flowers acknowledges he sees an implication in the verse. Flowers states what he thinks is that implication, namely, hearing is sufficient. The problem is that is not what the verse actually states. The problem is the rest of the surrounding text does not support Flowers' "implication."

. . . . (snip) . . . .

This issue is exactly why I often go to John 8.

Example #1: Jesus, the Word of God incarnate, is giving a simple statement to some people. "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (vs .31-32 ESV) Rather than accept that they were not free, Jesus' audience invents all manner of falsehood against Jesus. Jesus explains the spiritual reality of the situation.

"Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me." (vs. 43-45 ESV)

Jesus was proclaiming to these people good news about His word, abiding, being His disciples, and being set free. But they could not bear to hear his word. Why? Because their minds were of their father the devil, and thusly their minds were of the devil's deception, and their desires were in keeping with their father's. Thusly, precisely because Jesus told them the truth, they did not believe. Clearly, Jesus himself demonstrates that the idea, "hearing is sufficient for believing," is a false assumption.

Example #2: Stephen's sermon in Acts 7 is, at minimum, an attempt to get his audience to see Jewish history and their sinfulness in light of the recently crucified Messiah. As we all know from Romans, understanding one's place as a sinner before God is a key ingredient in the gospel. Until one is truly condemned and a sinner, then the rescue/salvation will not be seen as needed. Stephen's sermon was clearly rejected. A critical essential element of the gospel was rejected. This again demonstrates that the idea, "hearing is sufficient for believing," is a false assumption.

And this is precisely why Calvinists and historical Arminians go to the internal working of God upon the heart. Words will just be words to the depraved sinner's ears. The depraved sinner will reject it. The examples make clear that the gospel is certainly a necessary ingredient prior to faith, but the gospel alone (as only words) will only be ignored by children of Satan, precisely because it is the truth.

 

[His clay]

I guess we differ on what is good news. I consider the serpents head being crushed by Jesus the best news of all. Do you not realize that is where the historical beginning of the story of redemption is? That is the first place the good news is announced and everything that followed is working towards that end? What it does for the believer, the human element, shows up after Christ's birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension.

A very small amount of study would have revealed what is often called the protoevangelium. It seems that the other participant is either deliberately ignoring/dodging a super easy point, or the other is ignorant of an extremely basic aspects of theology.

 

[His clay]

That is quite the claim. I would like you to clarify why you think they don't. Your post certainly did not make that clear. You gave the title as being that Calvinists don't believe in the gospel, ended it on the same note. But everything in between seemed to be concerning you dissatisfaction with another individual in some other place, and Calvinist not believing in the gospel or any particulars pertaining to Calvinism, was nowhere found in it.

So, why do you ask why Calvinist don't believe in the gospel?

Perhaps I missed it, but I never saw @Dave respond to this post.

 

[Arial]

Perhaps I missed it, but I never saw @Dave respond to this post.

He never did.

 

[Josheb]

This issue is exactly why I often go to John 8.

Example #1: Jesus, the Word of God incarnate, is giving a simple statement to some people. "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (vs .31-32 ESV) Rather than accept that they were not free, Jesus' audience invents all manner of falsehood against Jesus. Jesus explains the spiritual reality of the situation.

That is a very astute observation. imausedat

"Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me." (vs. 43-45 ESV)

Jesus was proclaiming to these people good news about His word, abiding, being His disciples, and being set free. But they could not bear to hear his word. Why? Because their minds were of their father the devil, and thusly their minds were of the devil's deception, and their desires were in keeping with their father's. Thusly, precisely because Jesus told them the truth, they did not believe. Clearly, Jesus himself demonstrates that the idea, "hearing is sufficient for believing," is a false assumption.

While I believe the generalization is justified, a proper exegesis of the passage would observe the specific people to who Jesus is speaking is not explicitly identified. Jesus is speaking to a crowd Jews, in general, but he is repeatedly interrupted by a group of Pharisees and Pharisees are not ordinary people. The Pharisees are a very specific group of people for who God had a very specific plan of specifically horrendous and violent judgment. They were the leaders, the leaders of legalism (which kills) and hypocrisy (which also kills). They were the shepherds who led the flock away. While it is true the rock-bottom foundation is that every individual has sinned and is accountable for their own thoughts, choices, and actions, woe comes to those who lead God's children astray. It would be better for them if they had a rock tied around their neck and got tossed into the sea, Matthew 21:18-26:5 makes this abundantly clear. It was/is going to go better form Sodom than for the Pharisees. I would even venture to say it will go better for the Sadducees than the Pharisees because the Pharisees held the truth of the resurrection in their theology and still blasphemously insulted the Son. Every sinner ends up at the same fiery furnace/lake but the road there varies.

I'm just suggesting some caution and discrimination be applied when using that particular portion of Joh 8. The entire audience was enslaved by/to/in sin, but the Phars blindly relished in it with hubris and pride. In my previous post I mentioned those who seek to move God aside to sit on His throne. The Pharisees are wielding bats to make sure the novices never make it there and the climb on the bodies of those they've knock senseless.

Example #2: Stephen's sermon in Acts 7 is, at minimum, an attempt to get his audience to see Jewish history and their sinfulness in light of the recently crucified Messiah. As we all know from Romans, understanding one's place as a sinner before God is a key ingredient in the gospel. Until one is truly condemned and a sinner, then the rescue/salvation will not be seen as needed. Stephen's sermon was clearly rejected. A critical essential element of the gospel was rejected. This again demonstrates that the idea, "hearing is sufficient for believing," is a false assumption.

Amen. The entirety of the OT prophets' message can be reduced to a single premise: All of you who I gracious covered with my covenant (whether actual covenant members or not) have become covenant-breakers. All the curses of Deuteronomy 28 apply. Those promises are just as everlasting as all the blessings in that chapter. The underlying truth is they could not NOT be covenant-breakers. Not all Israel is Israel. Not all Israel is God persevering in the individual. Those in whom God is not at work, those in whom God is not persevering are poseurs, imposters.

Abraham is our father!

Yeah... no. Abraham is not your father. If he was, you'd do the deeds of Abraham, and the truth is you're trying to kill me (exactly as I told the prophets centuries ago you would). Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.

And this is precisely why Calvinists and historical Arminians go to the internal working of God upon the heart. Words will just be words to the depraved sinner's ears. The depraved sinner will reject it. The examples make clear that the gospel is certainly a necessary ingredient prior to faith, but the gospel alone (as only words) will only be ignored by children of Satan, precisely because it is the truth.

Yep. However, not to split hairs, in one sense a person cannot reject what they do not understand and, alternatively, they're not actually rejecting what they use to destroy (the atheist usually quotes scripture to measure the Christian, never to measure themselves. Scripture's existence, its veracity, is accepted, but solely as a tool of ridicule, mockery, and abuse). Meanwhile God is stacking millstones because the law of sin and death cannot be escaped any more than the laws of gravity or magnetism.

Do you think Lot's wife felt it as her body turned to salt?


Great observations, Clay.

 

[His clay]

He never did.

If your post is correct in its noting key details, then you have demonstrated the the opening post is an example of a hasty generalization fallacy. The poster utilized one poster, with a very doubtful interpretation of that poster, and generalized from that one poster into the larger category of "Why don't Calvinists believe the gospel?" Leaping from one doubtful example to the significantly broader category of "Calvinists" is a hasty generalization fallacy. What might be true of one is not necessarily true of the whole.

Other examples of the hasty generalization fallacy can be given to demonstrate the absurdity of the lack of logic.
(1) Hitler breathed air, and he was an awful person. Therefore, all people who breathe air are awful people.
(2) A kid somewhere forgets to take out the trash once, and he is then accused of always forgetting to take out the trash.
(3) A husband struggles to stay awake, and he dozes off during his wife's commentary of the day. He is then accused of never listening to her.
(4) A teen makes a bad driving decision, and then he is viewed by his parents as incapable of driving responsibly three years since the incident.

Edited to add: actually a non-sequitur fallacy might be more appropriate. Never justifying a conclusion. or maybe an arbitrary accusation could be appropriate.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Jesus is speaking to a crowd Jews, in general,

Jesus is always teaching His disciples, even when speaking to the Pharisees.

Others were welcome to watch the teachings, participate even, ask questions, but the main intent of all teaching was always to teach the disciples.

So what did Jesus teach us? That false teachers don't merely have different opinions, but rather, there is only one Truth and if it's not that Truth you proclaim then your a child of wrath fighting against God and His people.

There's either true teachers, or the enemy within and God will not only have no mercy on those enemies, but pour out a double portion of wrath on them.

Just generally I think. What say you? In other words, the audience matters less than the teaching itself, though audience is part of the story too, the teaching is always teaching disciples lessons.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Jesus is always teaching His disciples, even when speaking to the Pharisees.

Others were welcome to watch the teachings, participate even, ask questions, but the main intent of all teaching was always to teach the disciples.

So what did Jesus teach us? That false teachers don't merely have different opinions, but rather, there is only one Truth and if it's not that Truth you proclaim then your a child of wrath fighting against God and His people.

There's either true teachers, or the enemy within and God will not only have no mercy on those enemies, but pour out a double portion of wrath on them.

Just generally I think. What say you? In other words, the audience matters less than the teaching itself, though audience is part of the story too, the teaching is always teaching disciples lessons.

Oh, and I'm not trying to be judgemental or anything like that. I come across that way if I don't remember to take enough time explaining. In the end we are justified by Grace through faith, it's Christ's work that saves.

We can certainly disagree on the finer points, I wasn't attempting to go overboard with the thought processes.

I see these passages to apply to not only the Pharisees of Jesus' day, but also the apostate church throughout time.

 

[Josheb]

.....the audience matters less than the teaching itself, though audience is part of the story too, the teaching is always teaching disciples lessons.

That is not always true.

One of the biggest problems in the discussion of salvation is the propensity for volitionalists to take verses written about the already saved and regenerate believer and try to make them apply to the unsaved, unregenerate, non-believer. Audience matters because the teaching about the former group does not apply to the latter group. It's like trying to apply the aquatic conditions of a porpoise's life to that of an asteroid. Every time that argument is asserted is a categorical error, an egregious lapse in exegesis. Most of the gospels would be radically different if Jesus was in the central Americas speaking to Mayans or in Australia talking to Aborigines. Every Jew in the gospel lived in a modernistically initiated and maintained covenant relationship, even if they weren't actual members of that covenant. No such context exists with the Mayans or Aborigines. That context lends specific meaning to the teachings.

 

[prism]

I was challenged by Josheb to provide one verse that claimed 'believe and be saved'. I've been told by him that Romans 10:9-13 is not the Gospel because it was written to believers. I asked Him to share what he thinks the Gospel is, many times, but he won't. Then there are those who liked the post quoted below. Paul said this Gospel that we preach.

Romans 10:9-13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Here's the quote by Josheb


From post # 65 in the thread "Regeneration and born again are not synonymous", page 4.

Here's some more.

What Does the Bible Say About Believe In The Name Of Jesus And Be Saved?

Bible verses about Believe In The Name Of Jesus And Be Saved

www.openbible.info

Why don't Calvinists believe the Gospel?

I thought the Gospel was what Jesus did for our salvation, not something 'we do'.
As far as I know Calvinists affirm that.

 

[Homework]

I’ve heard John Calvin’s name come up in “history of philosophy” debates before. He’s a common citation for people who argue back and forth about determinism vs free will. Determinism is the theory that the universe is just a giant lottery machine, and almost all atheists are determinists, which is why some people who get in there question the baptists, since baptists themselves allege that they are not atheists, while it is definitely a trend in philosophical determinism that most determinists are also forthright atheists. The religious debate around it is over whether or not Jesus HAD to be sacrificed in the temple. Had he himself no choice? It’s a better argument than people think it is, because Satan did make the first move. God may be the creator, but in terms of a war between good and evil, or the need for God to redeem his creation, including everything from the Sun and Moon, to wales and salmon, trees and doves, and you, was Satan more powerful than God? In the sense that he went first, meaning that he could shout “I was here first!” In a true statement like you would if you’d made the first move in chess, won a marathon, or gotten suited up and charged into the basketball court before the opposition arrived. Fully expostulating determinism does prove that Satan won. He killed the prophetic messiah. You can’t refute that one with logic, you have to actually believe in the resurrection to make a further anti Herod-anti Satan claim.