Calvinism is Gospel !

[brightfame52]

What really baffles me is how they are okay with favoritism, exclusivity and preference.. they always find ways to rationalize.

"My rival is deeply baffled by a God who exercises sovereignty, preference, and exclusivity. But their emotional confusion completely collapses when faced with the ironclad Greek grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13. Paul writes that God hath chosen us from the beginning, using the verb heilato in the middle voice, proving that God sovereignly preferred and took us for Himself out of His own good pleasure. [1]

This preference is the ultimate definition of Grace. God did not look at us and find a single reason to favor us; we were by nature children of wrath, even as others (Ephesians 2:3). We were identical lumps of depraved clay.

Just as God looked at the ancient world and declared to Israel, 'You only have I known of all the families of the earth' (Amos 3:2), so He looks at the global world of the elect and draws them with an irresistible, particular love. Your humanistic free-will system wants a weak God who cannot choose, a God who must politely ask a clay pot for permission to love them. I will stand with the unyielding text: Grace is not a universal right distributed to all; Grace is the sovereign, exclusive preference of the King of Glory."

 

[Mem]

And sadly the 'root' of that system is often reflected in the current adherents. The desire to just smush out any objections, notwithstanding the person behind them, being one of the most obvious afflictions.

 

[HeIsHere]

"My rival is deeply baffled by a God who exercises sovereignty, preference, and exclusivity. But their emotional confusion completely collapses when faced with the ironclad Greek grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13. Paul writes that God hath chosen us from the beginning, using the verb heilato in the middle voice, proving that God sovereignly preferred and took us for Himself out of His own good pleasure. [1]

This preference is the ultimate definition of Grace. God did not look at us and find a single reason to favor us; we were by nature children of wrath, even as others (Ephesians 2:3). We were identical lumps of depraved clay.

Just as God looked at the ancient world and declared to Israel, 'You only have I known of all the families of the earth' (Amos 3:2), so He looks at the global world of the elect and draws them with an irresistible, particular love. Your humanistic free-will system wants a weak God who cannot choose, a God who must politely ask a clay pot for permission to love them. I will stand with the unyielding text: Grace is not a universal right distributed to all; Grace is the sovereign, exclusive preference of the King of Glory."

That was not written to you.
Always the wrong starting point.

 

[Magenta]

People like heishere will claim over and over and over again that inability is not
in the Bible no matter how many times it is put right under her nose. She is blind.
Such blindness seems to be quite prevalent among Pelagian heretics. It defines them.

John 14 v 17a, Romans 8 v 6-9 ~ “Inability” in Bible. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth. The mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind of the flesh is hostile to God: It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are controlled not by the flesh, but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. Praise be to God for calling me out of the world.

 

[pinebeach]

Perhaps that is why the love of Christ appears as so fearful to some.

He is not the same in Revelation as these doctrines of devils who teach (can you picture demons teaching those who have waundered away from the gospel, from the 'good news') would like some to forget. *

*1 Timothy 4:1: “The Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons” (NASB). The KJV words it as “seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.” A doctrine is a teaching or a set of principles. The “doctrines of demons,” then, are things that demons teach.

 

[pinebeach]

That was not written to you.
Always the wrong starting point.

I have been away awhile. What is going on here? From whence cometh all this copy/paste with no credit given?

What is he even talking about?

 

[HeIsHere]

I have been away awhile. What is going on here? From whence cometh all this copy/paste with no credit given?

What is he even talking about?

The Calvinist have this highly individualized way of interpreting scripture... Like every "you" is actually written to them personally.

This has been an ongoing debate with @brightfame52 even going back to another thread last year, I was just pointing that out to him once again.

 

[Mem]

Perhaps that is why the love of Christ appears as so fearful to some.

He is not the same in Revelation as these doctrines of devils who teach (can you picture demons teaching those who have waundered away from the gospel, from the 'good news') would like some to forget. *

*1 Timothy 4:1: “The Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons” (NASB). The KJV words it as “seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.” A doctrine is a teaching or a set of principles. The “doctrines of demons,” then, are things that demons teach.

I asked AI how many times 'fear the Lord' and how many times 'fear not' appeared in the bible, and if the algorithm includes the broader theme of 'do not be afraid' in searching for 'fear not' the numbers retrieved is a fairly identical result of "over 300 times." To me, this does well to indicate the healthy balance in the ideal reverence of God, which doesn't translate in any form to preaching the gospel as, "you should be afraid, be very afraid, but I don't have to be."

 

[pinebeach]

The Calvinist have this highly individualized way of interpreting scripture... Like every "you" is actually written to them personally.

This has been an ongoing debate with @brightfame52 even going back to another thread last year, I was just pointing that out to him once again.

I understand that. I meant what he is quoting from...thanks for answering. Where is he getting this and why isn't credit given since he obviously did not write this stuff

 

[pinebeach]

I asked AI how many times 'fear the Lord' and how many times 'fear not' appeared in the bible, and if the algorithm includes the broader theme of 'do not be afraid' in searching for 'fear not' the numbers retrieved is a fairly identical result of "over 300 times." To me, this does well to indicate the healthy balance in the ideal reverence of God, which doesn't translate in any form to preaching the gospel as, "you should be afraid, be very afraid, but I don't have to be."

How many times are humans greeted with 'do not fear' when a spiritual being sent from God appears before them?

When we fear and take our eyes off our Savior, we sink in the waves. Good metaphor that one.

 

[HeIsHere]

I understand that. I meant what he is quoting from...thanks for answering. Where is he getting this and why isn't credit given since he obviously did not write this stuff

You are far more observant than me. lol
There is a link at the number one, I just went and checked.

 

[pinebeach]

You are far more observant than me. lol
There is a link at the number one, I just went and checked.

Oh so that's his prophet? Well there should still be a notation in every post where the yackitty yack comes from.

Credit given where credit is due So he sees disagreement as 'rivals'? that could explain alot

 

[pinebeach]

The Calvinist have this highly individualized way of interpreting scripture... Like every "you" is actually written to them personally.

This has been an ongoing debate with @brightfame52 even going back to another thread last year, I was just pointing that out to him once again.

I've been involved with this thread because I find the thread title to be invoking some very bad heretical teaching.

The other thread, which I saw, was the usual 'we are evil and God makes us believe in Him' kind of repertoire of the embedded Calvinist class here and there is nothing in scripture that says that and this thread has proven much the same .

Coincidence? Not according to Solomon

 

[brightfame52]

What does the bible say?

I know that you would like to lose this discussion in a bunch of intellectual gibberish, but again, please answer these question. If you will not allow one truth to be built on another, then this discussion is pointless. I can't strip it down any more than this. Do you believe this, just as Romans 8:9-11 says?

• "Without the Spirit of Christ in us, we are dead, don't have Jesus."
• Then you state: "Having believed, they received the indwelling life that regenerates them."

Romans 8:9-11 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

----------------------------

The Spirit indwelling is the life. Without the Spirit indwelling, we are spiritually dead. With the Spirit indwelling born again, without the Spirit indwelling, not born again.

Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Galatians 3:2-3 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?

How did these spiritually dead believe so as to receive the life, the indwelling, which makes us justified, and born again and begins the process of being conformed to Christlikeness?

Dave

You accuse me of hiding behind "intellectual gibberish," yet your repetitive, circular questioning exposes that you are completely trapped by the explicit text of Scripture. You keep asking the exact same question over and over: "How did these spiritually dead believe so as to receive the life, the indwelling?"

I will answer your question with the absolute, unyielding, razor-sharp precision of John Gill’s high-priestly scholasticism. I will not give you gibberish; I will give you the exact structural mechanics of the Bible that your lazy, stripped-down system completely ignores.

1. Facing Your Test: The Timeline of Death vs. The Seed of Life

You ask if I believe Romans 8:9-11, Ephesians 1:13, and Galatians 3:2. Absolutely, I do! I believe them precisely as they are written, without twisting them into a humanistic pretzel. Let's look at your own math to show how your system completely collapses into pure, unadulterated Pelagianism.

You state:

• "Without the Spirit indwelling, we are spiritually dead."
• "Having believed, they received the indwelling life." [1]

Look at the terrifying, unbiblical gap you have created. If a man is completely spiritually dead before he gets the indwelling Spirit, and he only gets that indwelling Spirit after he believes—then who performed the act of believing?

According to your timeline, the spiritually dead corpse believed while it was still a dead corpse! You have a man who is "in the flesh," who is actively at enmity against God, who cannot be subject to the law of God, and who cannot please God (Romans 8:7-8), suddenly producing the greatest spiritual good in the universe—saving faith—entirely out of his own corrupt, unrenewed flesh! [1, 2, 3, 4]

You are trying to get the fruit of a holy response from a rock-hard heart of stone. You have made the fallen human flesh the author and finisher of faith, and you have turned the Holy Spirit into a mere reactionary prize boy who sits in heaven waiting to see if a corpse will make a good choice before He gives them life. That is not the Gospel; that is a carnal, free-will idol.

2. The Answer to Your Question: The Root vs. The Fruit

How do the spiritually dead believe to receive the indwelling Spirit? They don't. A dead man cannot believe. For faith to occur, the Triune God operates through a flawless, two-stage mechanism that you refuse to see because your system comes first, not the Bible:

• Stage 1: The Passive Quickening (Regeneration / The Seed of Grace): Before a sinner ever lifts a finger or utters a prayer, God executes a purely monergistic, secret, internal act of power. He does not send the indwelling Person of the Spirit of Adoption yet; instead, the Holy Spirit quickens the dead soul (Ephesians 2:5). He smashes the heart of stone and creates a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). He inserts a holy, living principle of grace—a spiritual seed (1 John 3:9). This fulfills Philippians 2:13 by actively working inside the dead soul to create a new spiritual capacity, a new mind, and a holy will and desire to see Christ. At this millisecond, the sinner is quickened, but they are not yet sealed with the corporate indwelling Spirit of adoption. [1, 2]
• Stage 2: The Active Faith and the Indwelling Seal (The Gift of the Spirit): Equipped with this newly quickened heart of flesh, the sinner immediately hears the Gospel. Because they now have spiritual eyes, they see the horror of their sin and the beauty of the cross, and they actively exercise initial faith. The moment they believe, God judicially awards them the indwelling Person of the Holy Spirit as the permanent, comforting Seal of their adoption (Ephesians 1:13, Galatians 3:2). [1, 2]

The initial quickening is the root that enables faith; the indwelling sealing of the Spirit is the fruit that rewards faith. Your system tries to get the fruit of faith without the root of quickening, forcing a dead man to plow his own soil.

3. Slaying Your Pentecost Delusion Once and For All

You attempt to use the bumbling disciples before Pentecost to prove that men can have saving faith without being born again. Your covenantal timeline is completely fraudulent.

If the disciples were completely unregenerate, dead in the flesh, and lacked any spiritual life before Pentecost, then how do you handle John 1:12-13? John explicitly states that those who received and believed in Jesus during His earthly ministry “were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” [1, 2]

The Greek text uses the plural aorist passive ἐγεννήθησαν (egennēthēsan), proving that their spiritual birth was a completed, sovereign act of God prior to their act of receiving Him. If they weren't born of God until Pentecost, then John 1:13 is a lie, because a dead carnal mind cannot receive Christ.

The disciples were regenerated during Christ's ministry; what they were waiting for at Pentecost was not the transition from death to life, but the New Covenant, permanent, corporate indwelling of the Spirit of Promise—a high-priestly glory that could not legally be poured out until the King was glorified (John 7:39).

Conclusion

Your argument is a self-defeating circle. You quote Romans 8 to prove that the flesh cannot please God, and then you immediately turn around and claim that the flesh pleases God by believing the Gospel before it has any spiritual life. You are trapped in the blind man's loop. [1]

I will stand upon the unyielding, majestic Word of God. God does not wait for a corpse to make a transaction. He sovereignly creates the heart of flesh, grants the gift of faith, and then seals His elect little flock with His indwelling Spirit for all eternity. Faith is not a human work generated by a dead soul to buy the Spirit; faith is the very first gasp of air from a soul that has already been sovereignly quickened by the Almighty King.

 

[Magenta]

The free will camp assumes, with no supporting text and contrary to many verses that evidence the opposite, that the man of flesh is free to choose, and will believe, that which he can neither receive nor comprehend, and to which he is inherently opposed with his uncircumcised heart of stone. There is simply no getting around the fact that this is the core of their belief, and it flies in the face of what Scripture actually teaches about the natural man who is a slave to sin and lover of darkness refusing to come into the light, blinded to truth and under the power and influence of Satan: he serves the law of sin which brings forth fruit unto death, not life. Without the indwelling Holy Spirit of God, his incurably wicked heart cannot be changed. He hates God, rejects the light, and hears the gospel message as foolishness. Praise the Lord if He has set you free!

Thank You, Jesus

 

[Anchorite]

So Brightflame is in her posts always quoting, without crediting, Prof. David J. Engelsma?

 

[pinebeach]

So Brightflame is in her posts always quoting, without crediting, Prof. David J. Engelsma?

Yes. It would seem the good prof. has sadly gone without credit for the most part.

oh. he (bright) is really a she? shrugs

 

[Anchorite]

In Brightflame’s first post in this thread, the history of John Calvin is summarized, leaving out how he advocated the execution of his theological opponents, like Michael Servetus’s burning at the stake at Champel outside Geneva on October 27, 1553.

 

[Magenta]

In Brightflame’s first post in this thread, the history of John Calvin is summarized, leaving out how he advocated the execution of his theological opponents, like Michael Servetus’s burning at the stake at Champel outside Geneva on October 27, 1553.

Calvin opposed the burning at the stake of Michael Servetus, but those with CDS lie
about this often. Such as you have done a number of times here, as well as others,
who may reluctantly one day accept correction on this historical fact, and then come
back the very next day repeating the lie all over again. Truth is irrelevant to your kind.

 

[HeIsHere]

In Brightflame’s first post in this thread, the history of John Calvin is summarized, leaving out how he advocated the execution of his theological opponents, like Michael Servetus’s burning at the stake at Champel outside Geneva on October 27, 1553.

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels
[Anabaptists and others] , who stir up the peoples to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated
Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

Writing in 1561 to the Marquis Paet (chamberlain to the King of Navarre),

Servetus . . . suffered the penalty due to his heresies, but was it by my will? Certainly his arrogance destroyed him not less than his impiety. And what crime was it of mine if our Council, at my exhortation, indeed, but in conformity with the opinion of several Churches, took vengeance on his execrable blasphemies? Let Baudouin abuse me as long as he will, provided that, by the judgment of Melanchthon, posterity owes me a debt of gratitude for having purged the Church of so pernicious a monster.


(in Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, ch. 16, section 136: “The Servetus Literature,” reply to Baudouin, 1562;

Seems like Calvin was willing to take credit for the "extermination" of Servetus.
I say give credit where credit is due