Calvinism and Context?

  • 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
Not open for further replies.

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
#61
Following on the same lines of observation of the text/ passages / book ect .( Inductive method) Which is basically what does the verse say .
Could we look at the next verse .
John 6.44 .
44No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Same principle as before.
What does the verse say ? not what it is presumed to teach .
The observation questions . To who , what , why , when ect. What's the overall intent of the writer? ( John ) John 20.31 helps .
Thoughts ?
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
#62
Following on the same lines of observation of the text/ passages / book ect .( Inductive method) Which is basically what does the verse say .
Could we look at the next verse .
John 6.44 .
44No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Same principle as before.
What does the verse say ? not what it is presumed to teach .
The observation questions . To who , what , why , when ect. What's the overall intent of the writer? ( John ) John 20.31 helps .
Thoughts ?
More observations. Does the verse say that the Father IS drawing ? or is it just a prerequisite necessary but not that He necessarily is ? If the Father Draws people to the Son does it mean they all necessarily believe. Judas was 'Given 'to Jesus but of course did not remain . is 'given ' and ' draw ' the same ?
Did the Father only Draw up to the Cross then after this , Jesus then does the drawing ( all men ) . Did the Father carry on Drawing after the cross ? Are there any verses ? Does the Holy Spirit draw? .
Is there a transition from before and After the death ,burial and resurrection, and the giving of the Holy Spirit that impacts how we should read John 6.44 ?
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
#64
The church has considered arminianism and pelagianism to be heresy for over a thousand years.

So..
Why do we need more threads promoting those things again...?
Yes its an 'in house squabble 'Arminianism is a branch of Calvinistic thinking, and it is wrong for all the same reasons that Calvinism is wrong.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,230
6,527
113
#65
good idea :)

For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth. The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers, the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.
Therefore know that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments; and He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will repay him to his face. Therefore you shall keep the commandment, the statutes, and the judgments which I command you today, to observe them.
(Deuteronomy 7:6-11)

  • did God choose Israel or did Israel choose God?
    • *hopefully* that's rhetorical question and we all know it's God who chose them
  • was it because of any merit on Israel's part?
    • nope
  • was Israel believing when He chose them?
    • nope, and adulterous, rebellious & wicked from day one
  • will God ever utterly forsake them even in their unbelief & hatred towards Him?
    • nope, never - for the sake of His name, and because of His great faithfulness
  • why is this in the Bible, are we supposed to learn something from it?
    • obviously, yes, this is testimony of the person and work of Christ
Regarding the Israel of our lessons in the Word, and perhaps related to your thoughtful post here, I will share, again, words which came to me when I first believed. They came to me giving understanding to my own satisfaction, and later I did read the same teaching in the Word.

Here are those words: "Now the children of Israel, while they were in the wilderness, were disobedient, and by their disobedience Salvation was gained by the nations."

As for my understanding, I will only say it is a wonderful revelation, and shows me the reason for the choosing of the Children, and who exactly Israel truly is' It is Good News always.
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
#66
Calvinism is false teaching ,so its hardly a minor matter . We have been given the message of reconciliation. That Jesus has reconciled the whole world and they need to believe this . If you think Calvinism is just another viable option ,you dont understand Calvinism .
Amen!!!

The false teachings of Calvinism are ubiquitous and heretical.

We are called to contend for the faith... and no Calvinism is not just another take on scripture.
And the reason it has become ubiquitous is because believers have not been guarding the faith.
It is quite tragic ...it teaches a different God and plan of salvation.
 

Journeyman

Well-known member
Jan 10, 2019
2,107
763
113
#67
And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. He spoke this word openly.
Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him.
(Mark 8:31-32)
all this, the LORD had said beforehand, long before His Incarnation; it is all according to the scripture. these things must take place.

O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
(Luke 24:25-27)
why does God say they "must" be this way?
Because Jesus said,

The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. Jn.7:7

Strange, because the prophets before and the disciples after were hated. But they were hated because they testified of God's word, but Jesus is perfectly One with his Father and the testimony of Two is true.

So from the passage you cited, did they hate Jesus without cause because he wanted them to? Was it God's will for people to hate him? This seems to be your belief.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
#68
Because Jesus said,

The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. Jn.7:7

Strange, because the prophets before and the disciples after were hated. But they were hated because they testified of God's word, but Jesus is perfectly One with his Father and the testimony of Two is true.

So from the passage you cited, did they hate Jesus without cause because he wanted them to? Was it God's will for people to hate him? This seems to be your belief.
Could you clarify what you mean please, not sure ?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,664
13,127
113
#70
So from the passage you cited, did they hate Jesus without cause because he wanted them to? Was it God's will for people to hate him? This seems to be your belief.
They hated Him, and still do, because they "must" - - this is what Jesus said, and I believe Him. Yes their despising is unjust but it must be so.

Why do you think God foretold all of this thousands of years before any of them were born? Why do you think Jesus said it must be so?
This is going back all the way to Genesis 3.

To me these are questions worth grappling with, but trying to bait one another into blasphemy or groundlessly accusing the historical theology of the church of having no basis in scripture is a waste of time.
 

Journeyman

Well-known member
Jan 10, 2019
2,107
763
113
#71
Could you clarify what you mean please, not sure ?
I mean Jesus is the witness of this world's hatred of God because he is God. Likewise, he is the witneess of people who love God because he is God,

Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. Jn.6:45

So, no one can come to Jesus unless they love or are "drawn" (attracted) by the Father.
 
Apr 2, 2020
1,144
425
83
#72
The church has considered arminianism and pelagianism to be heresy for over a thousand years.

So..
Why do we need more threads promoting those things again...?
Only one of them was condemned by an ecumenical council, the Synod of Dort's preceedings and procedures make it such that its conclusions only have authority in the minds of calvinists. It's kind of like if a Catholic cites Trent to say that sola fide is heresy or the council of Constance to say sola scriptura is heresy.

That said, Arminisiam is incorrect as its built on the same flawed anthropology as calvinism. John Cassian's answer to the pelagian controversy avoids taking on the pessimism of Augustine while still condemning what Pelagius was accused of putting forth.
 
Apr 2, 2020
1,144
425
83
#73
what's arbitrary is if God only chose a means of means of salvation and no one in particular to save. that's what i meant. but i will follow your tangent with you..

in my experience it's only those who find His sovereignty repugnant that accuse God of being arbitrary or capricious. but God does His will, Isaiah 46:10, and He shows mercy to whom He will, and His will is good and perfect, and no one gives Him counsel, Isaiah 40:13. He has set His Salvation so that it is not by human effort, desire or strength, but on God who has mercy, Romans 9:16. He gives the Son His sheep, and He knows every one by name, and loses none - He separates them from the goats.
the Father doesn't give the Son arbitrary sheep. He knows who are His. the Good Shepherd doesn't go stand at the corner and take whichever sheep randomly come near Him; that's what a thief does. the Good Shepherd seeks and saves His own, and they follow Him because they are His own - He is no robber: what is not His, will not be with Him.


God had already told Abraham that his descendants would be in bondage in Egypt and that He would free them. Genesis 15. that's not arbitrary, it's prophesy, and it's said beforehand so that they would know that He & He alone is the LORD and He does all His good pleasure according to His purpose, Isaiah 42:8-9.
What you are putting forth is not unconditional election, though. You are predicating God's choice on some factor that makes the sheep His by which He is choosing them. If there is nothing separating them besides the choice then the choice is arbitrary and they are His arbitrarily. You cannot remove the arbitrary aspect of such a choice through circularity, either God is selecting on a condition making the choice deliberate or there is no condition and the choice is arbitrary.
 

soggykitten

Well-known member
Jul 3, 2020
2,322
1,369
113
#74
Starting with a few of the popular verses Calvinsm teaches in support of the T.U.L.I.P i thought it would help to show if they can be supported, not by the TULIP but with context. Often the 'keep reading principle ' reveals the issue with some of the 'proof texts 'Calvinists use that they believe supports reformed doctrines .
The ' keep reading principle ' is of course as it sounds . Often a verse or passage is read in isolation to the bigger picture.
For example Romans 9 is read without including Romans 10 and 11 .Ephesians 1 without Ephesians 2 .
And many more like this which i hope we can discuss .
The other hermeneutic is asking the observation questions . Like what is the Author trying to convey? who's the audience? what's the central theme ? is it past ,present or future focused ? Who , when , why and what questions .
And finally the observation method . What does the verses say ? not what they are presumed to teach . One method I see being used often by Calvinists is 'deductive reasoning ' . An example of this would be . An 8 year old boy is seen doing 20 back flips in a row at the park therefore all 8 year old boys can do 20 back flips in a row . The observation of course should be we observe that this is not the case and that this boy is probably trained at gymnastics from a young age . This is done with the bible in that for example God opens Lydia's heart that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. This does not necessarily mean God always does this to everyone in the same way all the time. Other examples could be David numbering Israel , The drawing in John 6.44 ; Paul's conversion experience ect .

Ok starting with 2 thes 2.13 no prizes as to how this may be used to support Calvinsm. But let's see .
13¶But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
Thoughts ?
THE CALVINIST T. U. L. I. P.
REFUTED BY SCRIPTURE
Compiled by John Henry
 

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2018
8,318
1,184
113
#75
even more simply put, there is only one gospel and only ever has been one, and that includes all men, as has always been His will, that all men come to knowledge of Him. from Moses any foreigner could eat Pascha, they only need to become circumcised. and Abraham was not a Jew.











THE ALL MEN theory: That every time a scripture refers to "all men" it refers to "all mankind".

Matt 10;22, The all men that the Apostles will be hated by, does not reference "all mankind".

Matt 19:7, The all men that cannot receive this saying is restricted to all they to whom it is given.

Matt 26:33, The all men that shall be offended does not refer to all mankind.

Mark 1:37, The all men that seek for Jesus does not reference all mankind.

Mark 5:29, The all men that marveled does not reference all mankind.

Mark 11:32, The all men that thought John the baptist to be a prophet does not reference all mankind.

Mark 13:13, The all men does not reference all mankind.

Luke 3:15, All mankind did not question whether John was Christ, or not.

Luke 6:26, It does not reference that all mankind will speak well of you.

Luke 13:4, The all men is restricted to those that dwelt in Jerusalem.

Luke 21:17, The Apostles will not be hated of all mankind.

Luke 1:7, The all men are restricted to (verse 13) those which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 2:24, All men literally means all mankind.

John 3:26, All mankind does not come to Jesus.

John 5:23, The all men that should honour Jesus are restricted to (verse 24) those that have everlasting life.

John 11:48, The all men that will believe does not have reference to all mankind.

John 12:32, The all men that Jesus WILL draw unto him cannot reference all mankind, because it will not harmonize with other
scriptures that affirm that all mankind will not be drawn unto him.

John 13:35, All men will not know that they are his disciples, according to 1 Cor 2:14 the natural man, until he is quickened, will not
know.

Acts 1:24, All men literally means all mankind.

Acts 2:45, The all men is limited to every men that had a need.

Acts 4:21, The all men will not harmonize with other scriptures, for we know that all mankind did not glorify God.

Acts 17:30, & 31, The all men is restricted to those that have been quickened to a spiritual life, for we know that the natural man will not repent of breaking a spiritual law that he cannot understand, and thinks to be foolishness

Acts 19:19, The all men is restricted to those who were dwelling at Ephesus.



Taking a break, will continue later.
 
Jun 11, 2020
1,370
424
83
73
#76
ok I'm curious. I do recognise there is a difference in what certain 'reformed 'teachers taught. Perhaps a different term would help ? is the T.U.L.I.P better than 'Calvinism '. I suppose its like Arminianism. Not all Arminains believe exactly what he taught and he is often misrepresented. Like I dont think he taught much on 'loss of salvation ' .
Whats your thoughts on post 9#?
May I refer you to posting # 32. If this posting is left standing, as it is up to now, the discussion has become moot. 2nd Thessalonians 2:13 deals with a different salvation. As I said in my first posting, this verses does not help Calvin. It should also not be used to bash him, unless of course he deals with it in his writings.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
#77
May I refer you to posting # 32. If this posting is left standing, as it is up to now, the discussion has become moot. 2nd Thessalonians 2:13 deals with a different salvation. As I said in my first posting, this verses does not help Calvin. It should also not be used to bash him, unless of course he deals with it in his writings.
You keep saying ' Calvin ' I'm not bashing him. the term Calvinsm is used to mean the T.U.L.I.P. or as some prefer ( sounds nice and fluffy ) ' the doctrines of grace '
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,664
13,127
113
#78
What you are putting forth is not unconditional election, though. You are predicating God's choice on some factor that makes the sheep His by which He is choosing them. If there is nothing separating them besides the choice then the choice is arbitrary and they are His arbitrarily. You cannot remove the arbitrary aspect of such a choice through circularity, either God is selecting on a condition making the choice deliberate or there is no condition and the choice is arbitrary.
When God chooses something according to His own good pleasure, it is not arbitrary: meaning is derived from Him and His own will; everything is for Him by Him and to Him.

"arbitraryness" only entered the conversation because I said, if all God ever predestined was the only means of salvation and never the object, then the souls He saves are arbitrary to Him. i don't believe this. the Bible is full of individual, particular salvation. God knows who are His; Christ does not go out and seek arbitrary lost sheep, but the ones which belong to Him. He died for 'whosoever' and He is not ignorant of who whosoever is, not has He ever been: before He gave you existence, He knew you, and His purpose for you. you are not arbitrary to Him, and He is not arbitrary to you, but purposeful & intentional. there is no time in which He is ignorant of anything; He knows all things at all times and before and after the existence of time.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,664
13,127
113
#79
Apr 2, 2020
1,144
425
83
#80
When God chooses something according to His own good pleasure, it is not arbitrary: meaning is derived from Him and His own will; everything is for Him by Him and to Him.

"arbitraryness" only entered the conversation because I said, if all God ever predestined was the only means of salvation and never the object, then the souls He saves are arbitrary to Him. i don't believe this. the Bible is full of individual, particular salvation. God knows who are His; Christ does not go out and seek arbitrary lost sheep, but the ones which belong to Him. He died for 'whosoever' and He is not ignorant of who whosoever is, not has He ever been: before He gave you existence, He knew you, and His purpose for you. you are not arbitrary to Him, and He is not arbitrary to you, but purposeful & intentional. there is no time in which He is ignorant of anything; He knows all things at all times and before and after the existence of time.
All of that I can agree with, but the issue remains that there must be a real difference between those chosen and those not in order for the choice itself to not be arbitrary.

Something present within His sheep that is not present in those who are not according to which He is choosing them. Circularity doesn't solve that accusation of arbitrary choice. I.E. you cannot say because He has chosen them, therefore He knows they are chosen. In that statement the choice is still arbitrary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.