A BIBLICAL EXAMINATION OF CALVINISM

[UnderGrace]

Paul had issues with the female sex.

So you have no proof then, okay.

 

[Sackcloth-N-Ashes]

Who do you think Jesus was referencing in John 17:9 when he states "for them."

I asked you to reconcile those two verses. Why wasn’t Jesus praying for the world when God so loved the world? Reconcile these two apparent contradictory verses. The ball is in your court, my friend.

 

[Sackcloth-N-Ashes]

All points to service...election always takes place in time not eternity.

Wrong my friend. Salvation takes place in time but election took place from before the foundation of the world.(Ephesians 1:4)

 

[theanointedsinner]

Sackcloth, it was never in my character to do a single good, it's always in my character to be evil

sincerity, I can only apply it for evil
good, I can only apply hypocritically

 

[Sackcloth-N-Ashes]

Sackcloth, it was never in my character to do a single good, it's always in my character to be evil

sincerity, I can only apply it for evil
good, I can only apply hypocritically

Fallen man’s will is bent toward sin and self, that is for sure.

 

[Lillywolf]

Sackcloth, it was never in my character to do a single good, it's always in my character to be evil

sincerity, I can only apply it for evil
good, I can only apply hypocritically

God knows I hope you're not my neighbor.

 

[theanointedsinner]

God knows I hope you're not my neighbor.

then I'm willing to fake it till I make it to become a better person, and to become the man that God wants me to be

 

[theanointedsinner]

God knows I hope you're not my neighbor.

if hypocrisy is all I know, then I shall pray with hypocrisy, all hail hypocrisy
if sarcasm is all I know, then I shall pray sarcastically, all hail sarcasm
if fakery is all I know, then I shall pray with fakery, all hail fakery
if disrespect is all I know, then I shall pray with disrespect, all hail disrespect

hail, hail, hail

 

[theanointedsinner]

God knows I hope you're not my neighbor.

I pray hypocritically, amen
I pray sarcastically, amen
I pray with fakery, amen
I pray disrespectfully, amen

and amen

can I get an amen?

 

[theanointedsinner]

God knows I hope you're not my neighbor.

I lied, to you, the same way I always do

 

[Endoscopy]

“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48).

“What shall be shall be, whether it happens or not.”

We are going to get into a little strong meat, although I’m sure that it will give some folks indigestion. I want to talk a little bit about a teaching of fundamentalism. This doctrine is found in Bible-believing fundamentalism. This doctrine is found among those that do believe the King James version is the Word of God, just because you believe the King James version is the Word of God doesn’t make you exempt from teaching, nor does it make you exempt from false living. We don’t need to have any delusions about that.

The doctrine I would like to talk about is called Calvinism.
6
I’ll begin by presenting Calvinism like an old hard-shell Baptist might, showing why it is true. Then I’ll show why it is false. Calvinism is taught in all the seminaries. There is no way to get a higher education without running into it.

Let’s start at Ephesians 1:4

“According as he [that’s God the Father] hath chosen us in him [that’s Christ] before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love” (Ephesians 1:4).

Now here is how it is taught. That passage right there says that God the Father chose you in Christ before the foundation of the world. In Calvin’s system, that means this, you are already ‘in Christ’ before He even created the world . . . you are already saved, you are born saved, therefore you don’t need to be saved. You can see that you couldn’t go to hell if you tried.

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” (Ephesians 5:25).

What does that mean? That means that when Christ died on the Cross, He gave Himself for His Church, which is His body. He died only for the saved elect, which were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world. This is called in Calvinistic theology, “LIMITED ATONEMENT.”

It simply means that when Christ shed His blood on Calvary, there wasn’t enough to go around. The Blood only apply to the elect. Now hard-shelled Baptists will deny that, vehemently and vigorously, but it doesn’t make any difference—all hard-shelled Baptists believe in a Limited Atonement. John Calvin believed in a Limited Atonement, they all believe in a Limited Atonement.

“He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. . . he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Isaiah 53:11, 12).

This is talking about the atonement, this is to prove that Christ’s Blood was only shed for the elect. That is, only those ‘chosen in Him.” He ‘justified many,” He “bare the sins of many.” In plain words, Christ didn’t die for everybody—just “many.” The many of course, a reference to the elect—not everybody.

“Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28).

Not everybody, just many. So, when Christ came and died on Calvary’s cross, He didn’t die for everybody—Christ came down and Christ shed His Blood just the elect. They were predestinated to go to heaven because they were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. You say, “What about the rest of them?” Well, they are predestinated to go to hell. A Calvinist will deny that, and say, “No, we don’t predestinate them to go to hell!” but he is lying.

If you have a decree of Election—you must also have a decree of Reprobation. The decree of Reprobation teaches that those He didn’t die for go to hell. And another reason they go to hell is that the Blood isn’t applied to them, and the reason the Blood was never applied to them is because it was never shed for them to start with. That’s the situation. They say, “That’s not the reason the Blood was never applied to them . . .” Well, that’s beside the point. The point is they don’t believe that Christ shed His Blood for unsaved people. Limited atonement is what they believe.

Now you can see in this situation that if you were born right you go to heaven, and if you were born wrong you go to hell—there’s nothing you can do about it.

In Ephesians 2 we see that if you are chosen in Christ to be saved before you are saved, and the Blood is shed for you, then your salvation is automatic. And if your salvation is automatic, then you have nothing to do with it. This doctrine is called TOTAL DEPRAVITY which means that you are unable to do anything to save yourself, that the whole operation from start to finish is God’s work and you have nothing to do with it.

“And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1).

Which means what? It means that out here, in time, you were dead in trespasses and sins, and a dead man can do nothing to respond. Therefore, the Holy Spirit has to overcome this fellow, quicken him and give him a new birth before he can respond, because he’s dead—he’s totally depraved.

Now in that system, do you see what follows? If the Holy Spirit quickens that fellow, and He gives him life, then he repents. And then he believes on Christ. He could not repent until God quickened him, and he couldn’t believe until God quickened him. So you have a backwards salvation. The fellow is saved, then he repents. Then he believes, and he receives. That has some interesting overtones.

“When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18).

Here is proof that a man can not repent of himself. Here is proof that he has to be quickened before he can repent. If God doesn’t grant you repentance than a man can’t repent. So, repentance is a gift as well as the rest of it. Isn’t it amazing what you can prove with the Scriptures? The devil can quote Scripture.

“In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth” (II Timothy 2:25).

So, if God doesn’t give you repentance, you can’t repent. So, what happens here—this unsaved fellow sitting out here and he is one of the elect, because He was chosen in Christ back at the beginning—the Holy Spirit quickens the fellow, gives Him the new birth, and that gives him repentance. So he repents, and he receives Christ.

“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth” (Romans 9:18).

Pharaoh never had a chance.

The problem you ignore is Calvinism and it's opposite number Arminianism have lengthy discussions with scripture references for each of the opposing 5 points. Below is a saved item I post when someone makes a claim negatively about either one. The early elders between 212 and 500 created the creeds. They serve 3 purposes.
1. Define what a Christian must believe.
2. Define anything contrary to it as heresy.
3. Any Biblical issue outside of it is to agree to disagree.

This issue is agree to disagree. Both Calvinism and Armenianism have the Biblical Defense listed at the bottom of this post. Refute it if you can. I couldn't.

Quinquarticular Controversy
The diametrically opposed Calvinist and Armenian 5 points

Reformed/Calvinism
TULIP
1. Total depravity
2. Unconditional election
3. Limited atonement
4. Irresistible grace
5. Perserverance of the Saints

Armenianism
1. Free will or Human ability
2. Conditional election
3. Universal Redemption or General Atonement
4. The Holy Spirit can be Effectually Resisted
5. Falling from Grace

For a deeper discussion of the differences go to these web sites,

https://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html

Arminianism vs Calvinism Controversial Passages
https://www.xenos.org/essays/calvinism-arminianism-controversial-passages

There are denominations adhering to Calvinism, Arminianism, and parts of each creating a spectrum of different views of these issues.

Calvinism Armenianism debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Calvinist–Arminian_debate

Biblical Defense of Calvinism
https://www.fivesolas.com/tulipscriptures.htm

Biblical Defense of Arminianism
http://www.evidenceunseen.com/theology/calvinism-versus-arminianism/biblical-defense-of-arminianism/

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

The problem you ignore is Calvinism and it's opposite number Arminianism have lengthy discussions with scripture references for each of the opposing 5 points. Below is a saved item I post when someone makes a claim negatively about either one. The early elders between 212 and 500 created the creeds. They serve 3 purposes.
1. Define what a Christian must believe.
2. Define anything contrary to it as heresy.
3. Any Biblical issue outside of it is to agree to disagree.

This issue is agree to disagree. Both Calvinism and Armenianism have the Biblical Defense listed at the bottom of this post. Refute it if you can. I couldn't.

Quinquarticular Controversy
The diametrically opposed Calvinist and Armenian 5 points

Reformed/Calvinism
TULIP
1. Total depravity
2. Unconditional election
3. Limited atonement
4. Irresistible grace
5. Perserverance of the Saints

Armenianism
1. Free will or Human ability
2. Conditional election
3. Universal Redemption or General Atonement
4. The Holy Spirit can be Effectually Resisted
5. Falling from Grace

For a deeper discussion of the differences go to these web sites,

https://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html

Arminianism vs Calvinism Controversial Passages
https://www.xenos.org/essays/calvinism-arminianism-controversial-passages

There are denominations adhering to Calvinism, Arminianism, and parts of each creating a spectrum of different views of these issues.

Calvinism Armenianism debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Calvinist–Arminian_debate

Biblical Defense of Calvinism
https://www.fivesolas.com/tulipscriptures.htm

Biblical Defense of Arminianism
http://www.evidenceunseen.com/theology/calvinism-versus-arminianism/biblical-defense-of-arminianism/

Then there is always the literal interpretation of Scripture. I prefer 'thus saith the Lord' to 'Calvin' or 'Arminius' says.

Anything that changes the words of Scripture to mean something else (such as 'world' to 'elect' in John 3:16) is anathema.

 

[preacher4truth]

Then there is always the literal interpretation of Scripture. I prefer 'thus saith the Lord' to 'Calvin' or 'Arminius' says.

It is apparent you prefer "thus saith BBB" more than any other.

Anything that changes the words of Scripture to mean something else (such as 'world' to 'elect' in John 3:16) is anathema.

You need to learn the difference between changing the words of Scripture and determining the meaning of any given text, i.e. applying 2 Timothy 2:15. In your 42 years you've failed at this.

 

[John146]

Wrong my friend. Salvation takes place in time but election took place from before the foundation of the world.(Ephesians 1:4)

If this were true, if you were saved before the foundation of the world, then there was never a time where God's wrath was against you. There was never a time when you were a child of disobedience. This makes many passages including Ephesians 2 a lie.

 

[trofimus]

Wrong my friend. Salvation takes place in time but election took place from before the foundation of the world.(Ephesians 1:4)

If this were true, if you were saved before the foundation of the world, then there was never a time where God's wrath was against you. There was never a time when you were a child of disobedience. This makes many passages including Ephesians 2 a lie.

He said the opposite, i.e. that salvation takes place in time.

 

[John146]

He said the opposite, i.e. that salvation takes place in time.

Still would hold true. If God elected me before the foundation of the world, His wrath was never against me. The fact is, God chose Christ before the foundation of the world to be the means of salvation for man. One is not known of God until he believes the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

 

[trofimus]

Still would hold true. If God elected me before the foundation of the world, His wrath was never against me. The fact is, God chose Christ before the foundation of the world to be the means of salvation for man. One is not known of God until he believes the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Can you quote the verse saying that "God's wrath was against you" you mentioned? I will check whether it really contradicts election in its context.

 

[preacher4truth]

Still would hold true. If God elected me before the foundation of the world, His wrath was never against me. The fact is, God chose Christ before the foundation of the world to be the means of salvation for man. One is not known of God until he believes the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

You're clueless.

Even though the 1st chapter of Ephesians 1 clearly speaks of our election in Christ prior to the foundation of the world, yet, we were still under God's wrath as per Ephesians 2:3 as this is still dealing with the same persons contextually.

This is quite clear in the text to those who are converted and can see it. You outright reject this truth and many other truths.

Of course in the past, and present, you deny you are of those mentioned in Ephesians 1, the elect, and jump into Ephesians 2 claiming that is you. You also deny Christ as King, the Omniscience of God and other Scriptures.

You're like the one who doesn't go through the gate, but sneaks into the fold some other way, John 10. Your self-deception is remarkable to behold, you think you came to God your own way, and deny him and his truths, attributes, character and nature day in and day out.

 

[John146]

Can you quote the verse saying that "God's wrath was against you" you mentioned? I will check whether it really contradicts election in its context.

Ephesians 2:
1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

 

[John146]

You're clueless.

Even though the 1st chapter of Ephesians 1 clearly speaks of our election in Christ prior to the foundation of the world, yet, we were still under God's wrath as per Ephesians 2:3 as this is still dealing with the same persons contextually.

This is quite clear in the text to those who are converted and can see it. You outright reject this truth and many other truths.

Of course in the past, and present, you deny you are of those mentioned in Ephesians 1, the elect, and jump into Ephesians 2 claiming that is you. You also deny Christ as King, the Omniscience of God and other Scriptures.

You're like the one who doesn't go through the gate, but sneaks into the fold some other way, John 10. Your self-deception is remarkable to behold, you think you came to God your own way, and deny him and his truths, attributes, character and nature day in and day out.

Thanks for the kind words brother.

The context of Ephesians 1 is the spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in him, in Christ. The context is not believers, that's where Calvin gets it wrong. He tries to twist the Scripture to focus on the "us" instead of "in him". What was choses before the foundation of the world is that these blessings would come through Christ.

Again, one would never come up with the TULIP doctrine if all they had to go by is the word of God and not the false teachings of the RCC.

I do not deny the omniscience of God, just man's made up definition. Man tends to define God and then place God into their definitions.