Calvinism is Gospel !

[Magenta]

Proverbs 26 v 2 Like a fluttering sparrow or darting swallow, an undeserved curse does not come to rest.

 

[Magenta]

Jesus’ lament is not about His eternal decree.It is about His covenantal posture toward Israel. God can genuinely desire Israel’s repentance (Ezekiel 18:23) while still sovereignly ordaining the salvation of His elect (John 6:37). Matthew 23:37 is a lament over covenant-breaking leaders, not a denial of sovereign grace.

He had already been told and said he was aware of such verses as the mind of the flesh is hostile to God: It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those of the flesh being any not controlled by the Spirit of God, and the world not being able to receive the Spirit of Truth... and they are opposed to the Spiritual things of God, cannot understand etc etc. All just brushed aside as per usual, and denied they even exist by others... or, we are told they do not mean what we think. I think they mean what they say.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Total depravity is one of the five points of Calvinism. This doctrine teaches that man, every man, is by nature sinful and evil—only and completely sinful and evil. There is in man, apart from God's grace in Christ, no good and no ability for good. By "good" is meant that which pleases God, namely, a deed that has its origin in the faith of Jesus, its standard in the Law of God and its goal in God's glory. From conception and birth, every man is guilty before God and worthy of everlasting damnation. This is man's plight because of the fall of the entire human race m Adam, as Romans 5:12-21 teaches: "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned ..." Not only is every man guilty from conception and birth, but he is also corrupt or depraved. This depravity is total. One aspect of this misery of man is the bondage, or slavery, of man's will. The will of every man, apart from the liberating grace of the Spirit of Christ, is enslaved to the Devil and to sin. It is willingly enslaved but it is enslaved. It is unable to will, desire or choose God, Christ, salvation or the good. It is not free to choose good.

It is not Calvinism, that God forces men to sin or that men sin unwillingly, but that the natural man's spiritual condition is such that he cannot think, will or do anything good. On this doctrine, Luther and Calvin were in perfect agreement. Luther, in fact, wrote a book called The Bondage of the Will in which he asserted that the fundamental issue of the Reformation, the basic difference between genuine Protestantism and Roman Catholicism, is this issue, whether the will of the natural man is bound or free. Calvinism shows itself as pure Protestantism by its confession concerning the will in the Westminster Confession of Faith:

a). The doctrine of total depravity was an invention of Augustine who was trying to find a scriptural basis to justify the practice of infant baptism
b). His reasoning went like this:

(1) Baptism is for the remission (forgiveness) of sin.

(2) However, infants cannot commit personal sins like older humans

(3) THEREFORE, the sin that is supposedly removed from the infant through baptism must be a different TYPE of sin
Augustine searched the scriptures to find out what this sin was. Unfortunately, the scriptures he used as his reference were not the original Koine Greek scriptures written by the Apostles because Augustine COULD NOT READ GREEK - only Latin.

(4) Augustine himself acknowledged this weakness in his Greek education, writing in his “Confessions” that he found Greek studies tedious and difficult. Unlike his Eastern contemporaries who worked directly with Greek texts, Augustine had to rely heavily on the Old Latin Bible (Vetus Latina) and later the Jerome’s Vulgate. This dependence on Latin translations meant that Augustine’s theological conclusions had to be filtered through the interpretational filter of a translator.
(https://scalesoff.com/augustines-tr...ek-to-latin-errors-shaped-christian-doctrine/)

(5) It is not surprising that, lacking an accurate "map," to understand the original text of scripture, even a brilliant man like Augustine could be misled by his own presuppositions. We must also remember, that Augustine was not objective. He had set out to prove that an infants needed to receive baptism to remit their sins only since they are too undeveloped to comprehend even what SIN is the infant had to be guilty of some kind of sin he had not actually committed.

(6) To prove this, Augustine seized on
Romans 5:12, which in English reads:
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,
so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned.
This verse may seem less clear to us; however, when Augustine, consulted the his Latin translation, he read it to mean that when the ONE MAN ADAM sinned ALL his decedents sinned with him - since, we were all, at that time, genetically IN HIM.

This led Augustine to conclude that God IMPUTED Adam's original sin to the whole human race including the unborn and infants. Thus, while infants do not commit individual sins they are held guilty by God for the sin committed by their remote ancestor Adam. In their language, God IMPUTES sin to the infants in the same way God as how He, IMPUTES His RIGHTEOUSNESS to us in redemption.

(7) Although this seems to fit neatly into the theology of Augustine, Luther and Calving the fact remains it was not what Paul wrote. Remember, Paul, the Apostles did not write in LATIN. Their language and that of the Church fathers that followed them was KOINE GREEK The phrase Paul himself actually used in Romans 5:12 was not in whom [in Adam] all sinned

(8) What Paul actually wrote was: “ἐφ᾽ [upon] ᾧ [whom] πάντες [all] ἥμαρτον” [sinned]
ἐφ is a shortened form of the Greek proposition ἐπί which, can be used as a positional preposition to indicate one object as being UPON another. However, it can also be used in a metaphorical sense to mean ON THE GROUND OF or ON THE BASIS OF WHICH or BECAUSE OF. This is the sense the Lexicon gives to the meaning of EPI in Romans 5:12
(see: https://biblehub.com/greek/1909.htm)

(9). So, contrary to the doctrinal system invented by Augustine, all Romans 5:12 is saying is that
ALL MEN HAVE SINNED BECAUSE OF ADAM. The ancient fathers centuries before Augustine already understood the profound damage that was done to our human race because of our first parent's disobedience but one of those consequences was not personal guilt that is visited even on preborns, infants and children

 

[Bible_Locket]

Proverbs 26 v 4-5

That works too.

 

[brightfame52]

Whereas you made some mistakes in your presentation, it is incomplete. The walk with Jesus Christ is a lived experience in which his followers live according to his teachings and define their existence by how they think and act.

You taking the focus off the Gospel and focusing on the doings of men.

 

[brightfame52]

The doctrine of total depravity was an invention of Augustine who was trying to find a scriptural basis to justify the practice of infant baptism

No it wasnt ! Its the word of God !

 

[pinebeach]

 

[rogerg]

Not according to Romans 11

There are no pathways to salvation besides that of Jesus Christ, Savior. Therefore, were it possible that someone could become saved because of lineage, it would be in direct violation to the fundamental concept/doctrine of the gospel and mean other salvation plans from God exist outside of Christ. However, we know there is only one - that Christ alone was sent by God as THE Savior, and by whom is everyone who is to become saved, saved.

 

[Bible_Locket]

a). The doctrine of total depravity was an invention of Augustine who was trying to find a scriptural basis to justify the practice of infant baptism
b). His reasoning went like this:

(1) Baptism is for the remission (forgiveness) of sin.

(2) However, infants cannot commit personal sins like older humans

(3) THEREFORE, the sin that is supposedly removed from the infant through baptism must be a different TYPE of sin
Augustine searched the scriptures to find out what this sin was. Unfortunately, the scriptures he used as his reference were not the original Koine Greek scriptures written by the Apostles because Augustine COULD NOT READ GREEK - only Latin.

(4) Augustine himself acknowledged this weakness in his Greek education, writing in his “Confessions” that he found Greek studies tedious and difficult. Unlike his Eastern contemporaries who worked directly with Greek texts, Augustine had to rely heavily on the Old Latin Bible (Vetus Latina) and later the Jerome’s Vulgate. This dependence on Latin translations meant that Augustine’s theological conclusions had to be filtered through the interpretational filter of a translator.
(https://scalesoff.com/augustines-tr...ek-to-latin-errors-shaped-christian-doctrine/)

(5) It is not surprising that, lacking an accurate "map," to understand the original text of scripture, even a brilliant man like Augustine could be misled by his own presuppositions. We must also remember, that Augustine was not objective. He had set out to prove that an infants needed to receive baptism to remit their sins only since they are too undeveloped to comprehend even what SIN is the infant had to be guilty of some kind of sin he had not actually committed.

(6) To prove this, Augustine seized on
Romans 5:12, which in English reads:
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,
so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned.
This verse may seem less clear to us; however, when Augustine, consulted the his Latin translation, he read it to mean that when the ONE MAN ADAM sinned ALL his decedents sinned with him - since, we were all, at that time, genetically IN HIM.

This led Augustine to conclude that God IMPUTED Adam's original sin to the whole human race including the unborn and infants. Thus, while infants do not commit individual sins they are held guilty by God for the sin committed by their remote ancestor Adam. In their language, God IMPUTES sin to the infants in the same way God as how He, IMPUTES His RIGHTEOUSNESS to us in redemption.

(7) Although this seems to fit neatly into the theology of Augustine, Luther and Calving the fact remains it was not what Paul wrote. Remember, Paul, the Apostles did not write in LATIN. Their language and that of the Church fathers that followed them was KOINE GREEK The phrase Paul himself actually used in Romans 5:12 was not in whom [in Adam] all sinned

(8) What Paul actually wrote was: “ἐφ᾽ [upon] ᾧ [whom] πάντες [all] ἥμαρτον” [sinned]
ἐφ is a shortened form of the Greek proposition ἐπί which, can be used as a positional preposition to indicate one object as being UPON another. However, it can also be used in a metaphorical sense to mean ON THE GROUND OF or ON THE BASIS OF WHICH or BECAUSE OF. This is the sense the Lexicon gives to the meaning of EPI in Romans 5:12
(see: https://biblehub.com/greek/1909.htm)

(9). So, contrary to the doctrinal system invented by Augustine, all Romans 5:12 is saying is that
ALL MEN HAVE SINNED BECAUSE OF ADAM. The ancient fathers centuries before Augustine already understood the profound damage that was done to our human race because of our first parent's disobedience but one of those consequences was not personal guilt that is visited even on preborns, infants and children

That looks to be an AI generated summary of the blog post linked, https://scalesoff.com/augustines-tr...ek-to-latin-errors-shaped-christian-doctrine/


Though it is a bit scrambled in the pasting as regards infant Baptism and Augustine.

Infant Baptism pre existed Augustine by centuries.

In keeping with your AI generated ScalesOff summary, I sought an AI generated summary regarding that historical timeline. I hope this helps further the discussion in the correct timeline direction.

AI summary,Timeline Infant Baptism:

The forum post inaccurately claims Augustine (354–430 AD) invented infant baptism to justify his theology of total depravity, whereas historical evidence shows infant baptism was already a well-established practice centuries before his birth. Augustine actually utilized the existing, universal practice of baptizing infants to support his doctrine of inherited guilt against Pelagius. Further evidence highlights that key Church Fathers, such as Tertullian and Hippolytus, mentioned or documented infant baptism as a common practice around 200–215 AD. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

 

[brightfame52]

Romans 11 v 32 God has consigned everyone to disobedience so that He may have mercy on all.

Oh, meant to add to my last post also but edit time ran out: They thought the law would save them.

I agree that it is God who works in believers to will and to act in order to fulfill His good purpose.

That word consigned or concluded is the greek word συνέκλεισεν and one of its meanings is:

. to shup up on all sides, shut up completely; τινα εἰς τινα or τί, so to deliver one up to the power of a person or thing that he is completely shut in, as it were, without means of escape

so we are locked in or imprisoned in unbelief/disobedience. We cannot freewill ourselves out of unbelief ! Jesus must unprison us Isa 42:7

to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.

 

[Bible_Locket]

No it wasnt ! Its the word of God !

I agree.
1 Corinthians 2:14 and John 14.

 

[HeIsHere]

There is no verse that literally says, "regeneration precedes faith." But the idea is well supported by Scripture. For instance, Jesus teaches us in John 6:44 that


That’s the exact place where Jesus makes the statement about the Father’s prior action being the decisive cause of anyone coming to Christ.

John 6 is Jesus’ sustained explanation that faith is not self‑generated. The crowd thinks “coming to Jesus” is a matter of human initiative, but Jesus insists that the Father’s drawing precedes and enables any genuine coming. It’s part of the larger pattern in John: the Father gives, draws, teaches, and grants; the Son receives, keeps, and raises.

How is being "drawn" equal to being regenerated?

Yes please show me from the Greek where those two terms are synonymous.

Aside from that your think Jesus is telling the Pharisees the have not met the criteria for unconditional election?
Read the full chapter.... you will note it does not state gifted belief.

My goodness.....

First, Jesus was speaking to PHARISEES who didn't have God's word IN them because their forefathers FILLED them with TRADITIONS, therefore they were not drawn to Jesus because traditions don't have the power to do so. Only the people who were FED God's word would be drawn to Jesus because the Father and the Son have the same voice.

45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’
Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father.
47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.

Yeah there is a lot more there as well.

 

[HeIsHere]

Man is dead in sin , goal post that !

Where does scripture state that mankind is born unable to respond positively to the Good News of Christ Jesus unless they divinely, uniquely, irresistibly acted upon internally first?

 

[HeIsHere]

That verse along with many others about free will have already been posted - because we are spoilt for choice when we have all the books of the Bible to choose from to prove the obvious. You are wasting your time, all the scriptures will be denied by the daffodils no matter if you post one or a thousand. Oh sorry I meant TULIPS

It is beyond belief how terribly they handle scripture when it is their proof text and then yes other scripture presented in context they just deny.

 

[HeIsHere]

It is the height of insanity to claim that those who humble themselves have room to boast.

Humility, by definition, doesn’t allow for boasting as that involves pride, which humility opposes.

If your theological system requires you to make this argument then it is theology to be avoided.

 

[Bible_Locket]

That word consigned or concluded is the greek word συνέκλεισεν and one of its meanings is:

. to shup up on all sides, shut up completely; τινα εἰς τινα or τί, so to deliver one up to the power of a person or thing that he is completely shut in, as it were, without means of escape

so we are locked in or imprisoned in unbelief/disobedience. We cannot freewill ourselves out of unbelief ! Jesus must unprison us Isa 42:7

to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.

What appears obvious to me here is the opponents of John Calvin, who
made a doctrine that encapsulates God's Sovereignty and Predestination as taught in the scriptures, are unaware that Calvin is not the father of this ideology.

John Calvin made his own system or doctrine from the teachings of others.

Some of which were extant for over a thousand years.
Earlier purveyors of the same style of doctrine that predates Calvin,and focus on total depravity,sovereign God and predestination include,Augustine of Hippo.
The German Monk,Gottschalk of Orbais.
Thomas Aquinas and John Wycliffe lay the foundation for what would become known as the Reformation Theology.

In fact,in opposition to the Roman Catholic Church, Wycliffe referred to his church as The Congregation of the Predestined.

Then there is, Huldrych Zwingli who predated John Calvin's work in Geneva as the leader of early Reformation in Switzerland.

Then there is Martin Luther. Credited as the father of Lutheranism. Though he was as much a "Calvinist" as was John Calvin.

Zwingli was a strict proponent of God's absolute sovereign will.
When John Calvin utilized his teachings to form his own theology he wasn't as strict as was Zwingli. That way Calvinism did not make God the author of Sin. Something he saw as present in Huldrych Zwingli's theology,insisting God's sovereignty is absolute.

So,in short, Augustine pioneered the view of Total Depravity, God as sovereign, and who predestined the world, 1,100 years before John Calvin.

Martin Luther wrote a book on Total Depravity entitled, The Bondage of the Will.
To this day it affords one of the most intense defenses of TD ever written.

It appears John Calvin is the trigger that lights a fire under those in opposition to Reformation Theology. Even when they don't appear to realize,or know, John Calvin was not the originator of the doctrine of God's sovereign will,total depravity, or predestination theology.

Furthermore, those forefathers of Calvin garnered their theology from an author that predated they themselves by thousands of years as well.

God.

 

[WayneNSO]

It is the height of insanity to claim that those who humble themselves have room to boast.

Humility, by definition, doesn’t allow for boasting as that involves pride, which humility opposes.

If your theological system requires you to make this argument then it is theology to be avoided.

What do you mean - those who humble themselves have room to boast ?

 

[brightfame52]

Where does scripture state that mankind is born unable to respond positively to the Good News of Christ Jesus unless they divinely, uniquely, irresistibly acted upon internally first?

Man is dead in sin !

 

[brightfame52]

What appears obvious to me here is the opponents of John Calvin, who
made a doctrine that encapsulates God's Sovereignty and Predestination as taught in the scriptures, are unaware that Calvin is not the father of this ideology.

John Calvin made his own system or doctrine from the teachings of others.

Some of which were extant for over a thousand years.
Earlier purveyors of the same style of doctrine that predates Calvin,and focus on total depravity,sovereign God and predestination include,Augustine of Hippo.
The German Monk,Gottschalk of Orbais.
Thomas Aquinas and John Wycliffe lay the foundation for what would become known as the Reformation Theology.

In fact,in opposition to the Roman Catholic Church, Wycliffe referred to his church as The Congregation of the Predestined.

Then there is, Huldrych Zwingli who predated John Calvin's work in Geneva as the leader of early Reformation in Switzerland.

Then there is Martin Luther. Credited as the father of Lutheranism. Though he was as much a "Calvinist" as was John Calvin.

Zwingli was a strict proponent of God's absolute sovereign will.
When John Calvin utilized his teachings to form his own theology he wasn't as strict as was Zwingli. That way Calvinism did not make God the author of Sin. Something he saw as present in Huldrych Zwingli's theology,insisting God's sovereignty is absolute.

So,in short, Augustine pioneered the view of Total Depravity, God as sovereign, and who predestined the world, 1,100 years before John Calvin.

Martin Luther wrote a book on Total Depravity entitled, The Bondage of the Will.
To this day it affords one of the most intense defenses of TD ever written.

It appears John Calvin is the trigger that lights a fire under those in opposition to Reformation Theology. Even when they don't appear to realize,or know, John Calvin was not the originator of the doctrine of God's sovereign will,total depravity, or predestination theology.

Furthermore, those forefathers of Calvin garnered their theology from an author that predated they themselves by thousands of years as well.

God.

Total Depravity is all over the scripture.

 

[HeIsHere]

What do you mean - those who humble themselves have room to boast ?

Would you agree there can be no boasting if one has humbled themselves before God?

What would they boast about being humble? Then they were not really humble were they?

I would also add that since the condition to receive the gift of eternal life is the same for everyone, faith in/trust in God's good faith offer, no one can boast from that point of view either.

You did exactly what I did, no more, no less, it only takes a mustard seed of faith.

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9