Calvinism is Gospel !
- Thread starter brightfame52
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
This makes me so angry I have to spit. First of all, these are my thoughts. Were they generated artificially? Yes, they were. But not in the way you think. What I published are my thoughts, rewritten by a computer. For me, it is like having a professional writer at my side. Contrary to the picture you paint, I spend time with the text. I edit the text, I disagree with the text. I only publish what I think is true. I don't simply copy and paste what I read.
I'll give you an example. I will ask my AI buddy to reword the paragraph above. I will simply ask it to add clarity.
You’re free to weigh what I’ve said and decide whether it rings true. If it does, then receive it. If it doesn’t, you’re under no obligation to accept it. My only aim is to offer something helpful, and you can take from it whatever is genuinely beneficial.
We should wish Sunday School lessons dealt with such complicated issues.
Mine were too simplistic at the age of entering college, which I blame at least in part for the apostasy of a friend,
who was a missionary's daugher.
I have a similar issue regarding my songs:
Yes, after praying for 50 years for a garage band to put my lyrics to better music than my simple guitar strumming,
Suno answered those prayers.
However, because the word were mine and the instructions for the instrumentals were mine,
I see no reason to feel guilty for using invisible AI in lieu of the garage band that never materialized.
I'm having a similar experience with my YouTube channel. Because of AI, people are looking for clues to AI use, assuming that AI use lacks authenticity. I love making high-quality videos. But now my latest two videos are just my face and a bit of background music. People who watch YouTube want authenticity.
I agree with you generally. But sometimes in threads like this we forget to land the plane. I note that behavior is not listed among the chain of salvation. And as a description of salvation, I fully appreciate the chain that you described. However, in a thread that claims Calvinism is the Gospel, it falls short of the Gospel in a profound and significant way.
The chain you described, which is true for the most part, is static rather than dynamic. When we claim that our deeds are not meritorious, which is true, we must not at the same time claim that they are unnecessary. Let me give you an example from one of Paul's epistles. Romans 2:5-8
BTW here is my AI prompt. I give this for educational purposes. The following was my AI prompt.
Here is the result.
Paul’s argument in Romans 2 doesn’t teach salvation by works, but it does insist that certain observable markers inevitably accompany those who will receive eternal life. In Romans 2:5–8, Paul contrasts two kinds of people: those who “by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality,” and those who are “self‑seeking and do not obey the truth.” He is not saying that deeds cause salvation; he is saying that deeds reveal the kind of person one is. These markers—perseverance, a God‑ward orientation, obedience to truth—are the fruit of a life touched by the Spirit. And Paul’s warning is pastoral: if someone claims to be among the elect yet these markers are absent, ignored, or resisted, then they should soberly reconsider their condition. The gospel produces a transformed life, and Romans 2 insists that the absence of transformation is not a small theological glitch but a sign that something is deeply amiss.
My AI generated the paragraph above at my prompt. I hope this clarifies how I use the AI feature of my Bing browser -- Copilot.
And the reason good/godly deeds are not meritorious is because they manifest saving faith/cooperation/MFW with the Holy Spirit,
which reflection of His love remains God's non-meritorious condition/IF from conversion until death.
Salvation is a gift which can be received by anyone who trust's in Christ Jesus for it, it is a gift to be received because of His completed work on behalf of all mankind.
It is through Him and in Him alone, that is the narrow gate NOT unconditional election nowhere taught is scripture.
God desires faith and trust in Him and His TRUTH.
"Then He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.”
Luke 7:50.
NOT your gifted faith.
NOT my unconditional election.
The End
It is not an assault on the power and efficacy of the cross.
Because it has to be received.
God set it up that way.
It is indeed a completely miserable philosophy of exceptionalism.
There are philosophies that have more truth than Calvinist soteriology.
Any reason why you copied and pasted my post and then added the music but at the end?
It's all true... Even the parts that tells us to believe and those that tells us to persevere... Word of God. We mold ourselves around God's word, not the other way around
You claim your view isn't an assault on the power of the cross, but your own words completely betray your system. By stating that the cross "has to be received" by man's free will before it becomes effective, you are explicitly denying that the cross actually saves. You are turning the finished work of Jesus Christ into a powerless, hypothetical offer that is utterly dependent on the permission of a dead sinner to make it work.
Let the text of Scripture smash this unbiblical framework.
First, look at the vocabulary of redemption. Christ said He came "to give his life a ransom (λύτρον - lutron) for many" (Matthew 20:28). In a court of law and in ancient commerce, a ransom is not an offer of release; it is the actual payment that legally secures liberation. If a ransom is paid to a captor, the captive is legally bought and must be set free. If the captive remains in chains and dies in the dungeon, the ransom failed. By claiming Christ paid a ransom for people who end up in hell, you are claiming Christ's blood was a failed payment. You are presenting a defeated Savior whose ransom could not actually get His people out of the prison house of sin.
Second, your system creates a monstrous violation of divine justice known as Double Jeopardy. If Christ died to redeem His people from "all iniquity" (Titus 2:14), that means the sin of their unbelief was fully paid for on the cross. If a person goes to hell to pay for their own unbelief, when Christ already paid the ransom for that exact same sin, then God is punishing the same sin twice—once on His Son, and once on the sinner. That is a direct assault on the justice of God. God cannot justly demand double payment for the same debt.
Third, you say "God set it up that way," implying that man must provide the faith to receive the ransom. But as we have already established from Scripture, the ability to receive the gift is itself part of what the ransom purchased! Philippians 1:29 explicitly states that it is "granted (charizomai—graciously bestowed) to you on behalf of Christ... to believe on him."
God did not set up a system where He provides a possible ransom and then waits to see if blind, dead rebels have the wisdom to receive it. God set up a system where the cross actually breaks the power of sin, opens the blind eyes of His elect, and sovereignly causes them to turn, believe, and receive the inheritance (Acts 26:18).
The cross didn't open a door and hope man would walk through it. The cross actually, powerfully, and legally saved every single soul for whom Christ gave His life. Christ is not a facilitator waiting for man's decision; He is a conquering King who secures His bride from first to last.
Standard, I agree with you completely. Every single word of God is true, and we must absolutely mold our systems around the text rather than twisting it to fit our traditions.
Because we both agree that the commands to believe and persevere are vital, let’s look at how the inspired text of Romans 8:30 actually guarantees that those things will happen.
First, the text commands all men everywhere to repent and believe the Gospel. But as we have already established from Scripture, the carnal mind is enmity against God and cannot submit to Him (Romans 8:7). Therefore, for a sinner to obey the command to believe, God must first do a sovereign work inside them. Romans 8:30 names that work: the "Call." This is the effectual, life-giving call that transitions a dead soul into regeneration, granting them the very faith required to fulfill the command to believe. We don't ignore the command to believe; we praise God because His sovereign call is what enables His elect to obey it.
Second, you mention the commands to persevere. Monergism doesn't deny the necessity of perseverance; we emphasize it! But notice the unshakeable math at the end of Paul's chain: "and whom he justified, them he also glorified."
Notice that Paul uses the past tense for glorification to show its absolute certainty in the mind of God. He does not say, "whom He justified, some of them will persevere if they choose to, and hopefully they make it to glory." There are no dropouts in Romans 8:30. One hundred percent of those who are called and justified are sovereignly preserved by God all the way to final glorification.
So yes, the believer must persevere. But they persevere because they are kept by the power of God through faith (1 Peter 1:5). The command to persevere is the means God uses to move His people forward, and the Golden Chain is the guarantee that He will successfully do it.
Molding ourselves around God's Word means accepting the text exactly as it is written: salvation is an unbroken, sovereign work of God from eternity past to eternity future. God gets all the glory, and His people get absolute security.
We are called and God softens our hearts. We also know that we're protected by the Spirit while in Him. He will guide us to live Spirit filled lives with all its blessings. Acts 16:31 is an instruction to believe on the Lord, choosing our Lord and saviour.
Standard, you are attempting to lower the biblical definition of regeneration down to a mere "softening" of the heart so that man's free will can still claim the final credit for choosing God. But a softened heart is not what Romans 8 describes.
Let’s look at why your framework collapses when tested by the text:
First, if God merely "softens" everyone’s heart through a general call, but leaves the final decision up to man's choice, then you have a massive theological problem. If two people hear the exact same gospel and have their hearts equally "softened," but one believes and the other rejects it, what made the final difference? Under your system, it wasn’t God’s grace—it was the sinner's own superior wisdom, humility, or free will. You are forcing yourself to contradict 1 Corinthians 4:7, which asks, "For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" In the monergistic system, God's sovereign call is what makes the difference.
Second, you quote Acts 16:31: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Monergists enthusiastically shout this command to every sinner. But you are completely ignoring the spiritual condition of the Philippian jailer before Paul gave that instruction. The text says the jailer was trembling, fell down before Paul and Silas, and cried out, "What must I do to be saved?" (Acts 16:29-30
A spiritually dead rebel who hates God (Romans 8:7) does not tremble in conviction and beg for salvation on his own. The jailer’s brokenness was the immediate, visible proof that the Holy Ghost had already sovereignly invaded his dead heart through the life-giving, effectual call. The command to "believe" did not give a dead man a choice; it directed a newly resurrected, living soul exactly where to look for comfort.
Third, you say we are protected "while in Him," implying that our security is dependent on our performance to stay inside the boundary. But Romans 8:30 leaves no room for dropouts. The chain is an absolute guarantee: "whom he justified, them he also glorified." God doesn't just protect us while we choose to stay; He actively protects us from our own fallen fleshly weaknesses to ensure we will stay. As 1 Peter 1:5 states, we are "kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation."
The call of God doesn't just offer guidance to a cooperative sinner; it powerfully transforms an enemy into a child, ensuring they will believe, obey, and endure to the very end.
Here's the issue.
Full disclosure.
If indeed those were your thoughts put into an AI so to publish it here, you should note that. As I and others do.
Because otherwise, the post, that includes AI intelligence filling the holes in your thoughts , without that full disclosure post to readers, is dishonest.
YouTube has started marking AI generated videos with a warning. "AI".
The Bible often makes reference to this, particularly by saying a new heart of flesh rather than stone (Ezekiel 11:19 & 36:26).
On the flip-side He hardens hearts too (Exodus 7:3–4).
He does the work, He has done it, in fact. We just put our faith in Him (Mark 11:22), that's all. None of that is our work, having faith in God isn't earning salvation, it's accepting a free gift.
As for "drop outs" Colossians 1:22-23 and John 15:6, for example are firm warnings about remaining in God. Clearly it can be done....
Sorry, I don't see it as dishonest.
Here is a tightened, coherent, formal‑argument version of what you’re trying to say. I keep your core claims but give them a clear logical structure and polish the prose so it reads as a principled position rather than a personal defense.
Formal Argument
Thesis: In a Bible‑discussion forum, it is not dishonest to present information without appealing to one’s own authority, because the norms of such a forum place the burden of evaluation on the readers rather than on the credentials of the writer.Argument:
- Premise 1: A claim is dishonest only when it relies on a false or misleading appeal to authority—namely, when a speaker expects others to accept a conclusion because the speaker said so. This follows the basic principle that an argument from authority is valid only when the authority is legitimately invoked; otherwise, it becomes a distortion of the truth.
- Premise 2: In a Bible‑discussion forum, participants are not expected to accept arguments on the basis of personal authority. The shared expectation is that each reader evaluates the information presented and forms an independent judgment. The forum’s norms therefore remove the structural possibility of coercive authority claims.
- Premise 3: When the source of information is not presented as authoritative, and when readers are explicitly free to assess the argument on its own merits, the honesty of the argument does not depend on the speaker’s credentials. The content is what is evaluated, not the status of the person presenting it.
- Conclusion: Therefore, presenting information in such a forum—without claiming expertise, without demanding belief, and without grounding the argument in personal authority—is not dishonest. The verity of the information depends on the argument itself, not on expert endorsement, and the readers’ freedom to evaluate the material ensures transparency rather than deception.
- Status