Non-ending misconceptions about the reformed faith

[Meggido]

election is election, believing is believing... not sure what you are asking for

Is belief taken away because of election?

I knew a hard core reformer and he said he did not need to believe in anything, because he was elected and no matter what he was making heaven.

Not trying to inflame, but honestly, I think there are so many different understanding of reformed and Calvinist it is nothing but a big ole cup of muddy water.

I know some reformed Calvinist who take you task because you do not adhere to what they do and vice verse.

 

[Johnny_B]

"World" in 3:16 means the same thing as the "world" in John 3:17:
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

Who are saved? The ones who believe. Not whole the world - that would be universalism.

​What translation is that, because the ESV has it like this. "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him."

 

[Ariel82]

"World" in 3:16 means the same thing as the "world" in John 3:17:
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

Who are saved? The ones who believe. Not whole the world - that would be universalism.

Destroying evil and injustice is part of saving the world.

 

[valiant]

I can agree with most of what is written in some form or other.

Where I see the big dis-connect is for many Christians is in this statement.

5. So why to preach the Gospel?
- for the elect ones so they can hear it and respond positively and be saved
- for the non-elect ones it is a preaching of the coming judgement

What this ( #5 ) appears to be saying by many Christians - is that God has predetermined who is going to hell because of His own choice and He does not offer them eternal life. He does not offer them the choice to believe in Christ because they are not the "elect".

All men are bound for Hell by their own sinfulness. He has predetermined who is going to Heaven. All are offered salvation, but only the elect will accept it.

"If" this is true - then it violates the abundance of scriptures that talk about the world and whosoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

How? The offer is to the whole world and whoever will may come. But if He had not elected some none would respond (Eph 2.1-3).

And as Paul says to Timothy that God is the Savior of the world especially of believers. Why believers? Because they believed when they heard the message of Christ.

But why did they believe? Because God has worked saving faith their hearts. He says so quite plainly. Rom 9)

The other thing is that #5 it completely violates the whole "why" behind the gospel in the first place. God so loved the world - that He gave.

The world as opposed to the Jews. But it does not mean 'everyone in the world' except in a general sense.

It is also a violation of the very nature and character of God.

Is it God's fault that men do not respond to Him?

This is like saying that a parent has 5 children - the house is on fire and is going to destroy those whom the parent loves. He chooses on purpose to tell 3 of his children that if they believe in him and jump in his arms - they will be saved from the fire.

But if three was somehow the maximum that could be saved, the choice must be made. The same is true of election, As Paul says, who are we to question God?

Here is the kicker - He refuses the other 2 children the opportunity to be saved from the fire because of His own personal choice for them. You are not part of the "elect".

But there may be reasons for the limit beyond our comprehension,

The heart and mind of man is not designed by God to trust such a being that would do this.

Only those who are reformed? lol

We would throw people in jail for doing such a horrendous thing. Where do we get this sense of moral rightness from? From God of course. Will not the God of all justice do what is right?

He will do what HE sees to be right, not what we see.

My own personal view of the elect is that Jesus Himself is the elect and all that believe in Him become the elect because they are one spirit with Him. Those that believe are predestined to be in Christ and Christ to be in them. It's a simple matter.

But that leaves us with suggesting thatGod is merely indicating truisms when He speaks of election

 

[trofimus]

Is belief taken away because of election?

I knew a hard core reformer and he said he did not need to believe in anything, because he was elected and no matter what he was making heaven.

Not trying to inflame, but honestly, I think there are so many different understanding of reformed and Calvinist it is nothing but a big ole cup of muddy water.

I know some reformed Calvinist who take you task because you do not adhere to what they do and vice verse.

He is not hardcore reformer, he is stupid.

The elect ones will do what is needed to be done. Because Bible and the logic say so.

 

[Ariel82]

Ok.. I do not know what to say, because I am not from any of those countries I think that the German theology (of the older age) was the top of systematics in the world. If you read Leibniz, you know what I mean.

The Czech one was more to the practical life, like Moravian brothers, Unity fratrum etc.

If you mix this, you will get - me

I heard that Wesley was strongly influenced by a Moravian that sailed with him from England to the American colonies. I believe it was from this brother he heard preaching about how salvation is by grace and not works.

I don't know much about them, but we had a Moravian love feast for Christmas celebration because one of our members grew up Moravian.

What do you know of them?

 

[trofimus]

​What translation is that, because the ESV has it like this. "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him."

Not sure, taken from the biblehub.com, I guess it was the first one, i.e. NIV

 

[Willie-T]

Can you say it shorter? 3 sentences max? I will give a short answer then.

My point has 2 sentences

Are you not being hypocritical here?

Your OP (#1) was 469 words long
777's answer to it (3) was only 411 words long.

Yet, here in Post #4 you are claiming he has to shorten his reply to three sentences, max...... and then you will consent give to him an answer.

That is a ludicrous request. LOL

 

[Meggido]

He is not hardcore reformer, he is stupid.

The elect ones will do what is needed to be done. Because Bible and the logic say so.

Thank you, I thought the same thing.

 

[trofimus]

I heard that Wesley was strongly influenced by a Moravian that sailed with him from England to the American colonies. I believe it was from this brother he heard preaching about how salvation is by grace and not works.

I don't know much about them, but we had a Moravian love feast for Christmas celebration because one of our members grew up Moravian.

What do you know of them?

Many things... Jan Amos Komenský, the last bishop of the Unity of brethren is my favourite "teacher". I like his Labyrinth or "Only one is needed".

You can also read "About the Church" by Jan Hus, its more about predestination than the works of Calvin And 300 years older.

 

[Ariel82]

I agree with this statement "There is a vast difference between a universal atonement and universalism."

 

[Ariel82]

C'mon willie, don't you Twitter? #justkindingwithya

 

[Ariel82]

Many things... Jan Amos Komenský, the last bishop of the Unity of brethren is my favourite "teacher". I like his Labyrinth or "Only one is needed".

You can also read "About the Church" by Jan Hus, its more about predestination than the works of Calvin And 300 years older.

Will have to look it up. Thanks for the recommendation.

 

[Willie-T]

C'mon willie, don't you Twitter? #justkindingwithya

?????????????????

 

[Johnny_B]

Not sure, taken from the biblehub.com, I guess it was the first one, i.e. NIV

​Sometimes I wonder about the NIV.

 

[FreeNChrist]

"Turn to your Bible and read for yourself in the only two chapters in which this word predestinate or predestinated is found. The first is Romans:8:29-30, the other chapter is Ephesians:1:5 and 11.

You will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either heaven or hell but to Christ-likeness eventually. Nowhere are we told in scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another to be lost. Men are to be saved or lost eternally because of their attitude towards the Lord Jesus Christ. Predestination means that someday all the redeemed shall become just like the Lord Jesus"

"D.L. Moody used to put it very simply the elect are the 'whosoever wills' the non-elect 'whosoever wont's'. This is exactly what scripture teaches, the invitation is to all, those who accept it are the elect. Remember, we are never told that Christ died for the elect".

"Whosoever means, whosoever." Only a biased theologian, with an axe to grind, could ever think that it meant only the elect."


--H.A. Ironside

 

[trofimus]

​Sometimes I wonder about the NIV.

NIV seems to go by its own way

But it does not mean its a wrong way.

 

[valiant]

"Turn to your Bible and read for yourself in the only two chapters in which this word predestinate or predestinated is found. The first is Romans:8:29-30, the other chapter is Ephesians:1:5 and 11.

But there is a difference between the doctrine of election and the meaning of predestination. We are defending a Scriptural truth, not the use of a word.

You will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either heaven or hell but to Christ-likeness eventually. Nowhere are we told in scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another to be lost.

R

Rom 9.18-23 come very close

Men are to be saved or lost eternally because of their attitude towards the Lord Jesus Christ. Predestination means that someday all the redeemed shall become just like the Lord Jesus"

the particular word may be used in that way. The Bible prefers other words (eg elect, foreknow) to present its truth. We are elect to be predestinated.

"D.L. Moody used to put it very simply the elect are the 'whosoever wills' the non-elect 'whosoever wont's'.

skipping the issue LOL this is simply unscriptural, or a truism

This is exactly what scripture teaches, the invitation is to all, those who accept it are the elect. Remember, we are never told that Christ died for the elect".

that is not what the scripture teaches. It is his interpretation of scripture.

"Whosoever means, whosoever." Only a biased theologian, with an axe to grind, could ever think that it meant only the elect."

But a scriptural axe? The offer is open to all, but only those chosen will come (Joh 6.38-44)

 

[Depleted]

Show me where I directly insulted you and I will apologize. Please direct me to the exact post where I insulted you personally because I want to see it and if I did do it - make amends because it is not good behavior. Thanks!

How about every post you made in the "What Calvinist believe" thread? And it wasn't just me. It was every Calvinists who responded, Kayla -- who asked -- and every Arminian/Wesleyan/nonTULIPers. The most important thing you just had to write had to do with the same thing you're doing here. It's all about what you believe, instead of listening. Again, most people don't care if you disagree, just if you at least take the time to find out what it is. You haven't even done that, because you spend your time telling us why you disagree and then keep adding that you really don't care.

Thank you so much for not really caring what others believe or for not caring about Calvinists nor nonTULIPers. That cuts down on everyone on these boards but you and a very small portion of others. You didn't even bother responding to people responding to you. You completely ignore what anyone else said! (I suspect you didn't even bother reading anything else, but I'm not sure there.)

You're doing it again! It's STILL all about you on a thread about a belief you don't like, despite never learning what it is.

 

[Depleted]

Ok.. I do not know what to say, because I am not from any of those countries I think that the German theology (of the older age) was the top of systematics in the world. If you read Leibniz, you know what I mean.

The Czech one was more to the practical life, like Moravian brothers, Unity fratrum etc.

If you mix this, you will get - me

Ah, but you can answer. How do Reformers do Sunday Service where you live? I really don't know. (I also didn't know the US does it differently than the UK and Australia, so I learned that in that video.) Is it like any of the countries he talked about, or is it different? And if it is different, what is done? That's what I'm asking.