1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

IF CALVINISM IS TRUE, WHY AREN'T ALL BELIEVERS CALVINISTIC?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Skandelon, Jul 30, 2004.

  1. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ok. Thank you. Please remember this in the future when you and others insist on answers that go beyond what scriptures reveal. (I hope Nick is reading this because He is the reason I made this point)


    Wrong!

    Actually I came to believe what I believe while trying to disprove it so I KNOW it wasn't because it "seemed right to me." It was because that was the best interpretation of the text when all things were considered.

    Try asserting some of those God given mental abilities occasionally and maybe you won't have this problem ;)

    Seriously, Larry, I have not only claimed that Calvinism is wrong simply because it doesn't make sense for God to harden a dead man, that is just ONE of the MANY reasons I have pointed out to draw attention to the truth of the scriptures teaching on this issue that you seem to think is irrelevant.

    BTW, you guys ask logic based "why" questions to test the consistancy of our postition all the time so I don't know why you are treating me as if this is some new thing, especially for a debate board.

    My point has ALWAYS been that hardening is the Calvinistic blind spot. I know because I was blinded to it too at one time as a Calvinist myself, who btw had no trouble accepting what the scripture seemed to teach eventhough it was a difficult teaching, which shows that is not my problem here. The problem with Calvinism is that it never properly deals with judicial hardening. It is used as support for the concept that men are born Totally Depraved but as I have continually pointed out that is not what these verses teach, in fact they contradict that teaching in more than one way. That is what you fail to deal with.

    But earlier you said it was God who gave you what you needed to submit fully to the truth of the scripture and that it wasn't of yourself. Which is it?

    I'm merely drawing the same conclusion you draw in regard to salvation Larry. There must be "something good in us" if we will to believe in Christ according to many of you guys and scripture never teaches that, so what is the difference?

    I'm sorry, I do miss some things. Could you point out to me where you answered the question as to why God doesn't give doctrinal understanding to all of us?

    Oh wait....was that the one where you said, "I don't know"???

    Could it be because God has given men a choice Larry? Couldn't it just be that simple?

    Then all I ask is that you deal with God's word. All of it. Not just the parts of it you like or the parts of it that seem "relevant" to you.
     
  2. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1

    We are all at differing levels of holiness because of our choices and responses to God and His Word. Obedience leads to holiness and reward. Disobedience leads to a lack of holiness and punishment. It is quite simple when you don't try to convolute it into a system of thought contrayery to the scripture.

    Now that is a straw man. I never said or even implied that God doesn't intervene in the lives of men, especially in the lives of believers. He intervenes all the time which affects our will and we are responsible for our response to his interventions in our life. Having free will does'nt in any way negate the use of means. The means are used BECAUSE we have free will. Signs and wonders were used to persuade men....jealousy was used to provoke men....parables were used to keep outsiders in the dark....all means to deal with men's will which is why the teaching of such means flies in the face of a doctrine such as yours that really doesn't need any means.

    You make it seem as if "enlightenment" must be something more than God Himself in the flesh speaking with a human tongue, and writing it on paper for us to read for ourselves, and sending men all over the world to speak it clearly to us in our own language. That sounds pretty "enlightening" to me! What more did you want him to do to "enlighten" us?

    We hear the word and we respond to it, then we are judged according to that response. Why is that so difficult?


    Whose fault is that? Isn't that the responsiblity of the one passing out the "enlightenment". If he has chosen not to enlighten some then how could they ever become a Calvinist? And why wouldn't he choose to enlighten everyone to this "truth?"

    Exactly my point. Some believers clearly die without ever being "enlightened" into Calvinistic dogma. Whose fault is that? Why didn't God sovereignly enlighten all of his believers?

    I don't wish to go down that road. Are you disputing these men's salvation? Do you dispute my salvation? If not, then my point has been made. If so, then we have another debate on our hands.
     
  3. Southern

    Southern New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skan,
    Sorry it has taken me so long to read my last post and your input on it. Hope I don't change the subject.
    You said:
    My question is why? IF Calvinism is the correct doctrine of Soteriology which has God sovereingly gaurenteeing the faith of men, WHY would that faith lead to SO many different nuaises of belief?

    Me: Soteriology (specifically the gospel) is not to be confused with all the deep truths and other things that are not relevant to salvation (eschatology). Men Can believe that "He that believeth on Him is not condemned (John 3:18)" and not be perfect in their theology. God has a purpose in why He does what He does but the secret will of God is not revealed to us (Deut. 29:29). We are to live on what he has revealed, and He has not promised us perfection until we are glorified with Him (Rom. 8:29). So to ask anything more than God has promised is to go beyond what the scriptures tell us to.

    Thanks and may God bless you
     
  4. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    I haven't make a post at baptistboard for a long, long time. I have reading through on this. I read the argument between Skandelon and Pastor Larry. I agree with Skandelon. He made many good points.

    I am neither Calvinist or Arminian. I am a simple believer. The most things that I disagree with Calvinism than Arminianism. Because, Calvinism seems do not believe that we all have choices and make decisions in our life. I do believe in freewill. Also, I do believe God gaves us freewill to make decisions.

    Was Adam, a robot?

    God told Adam, not to eat fruit, if eat, will surely die. Does God make Adam, a robot?

    Who told Adam to eat fruit?

    Who's responsible for sin and death?

    There are so overwhelm evidences in the Scriptures teaching us of conditional salvation, because of our own decisions. There are lot of warnings in the Bible to us.

    Does God desire all people (6 billions) of the world go to hell?

    What is the purpose of Calvary, also Gospel too??

    I am sure, many of Arminianists are true believers, even, also many Calvinists are true believers too. Because of both believe Jesus Christ died on the cross for them, also, both did follow Christ.

    BUT.... I am sure either both of them are not believer, because of disobedient, and make their own choice to follow world than Christ.

    Christ don't care what kind of religion we are. Christ interesting in us, that he expects us to obey and follow Him.

    In Christ,
    Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
     
  5. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi DeafPosttrib -- good to see you back around. I was gone for quite a while, myself.
     
  6. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hello, Deafposttrib:

    How've you been. You're one of the few non-Calvinists here who use gracious words, thanks.

    Anyway, you ask:

    No. He was the one and only human being who really had freewill, being a direct creation of God, and created free from the bondage of sin, created perfect and free from sin. He had a choice to obey his Creator with whom He communed face to face, and who provided him with everything he needed, no restrictions, save one, and he blew it.

    In believing the serpent, another creature, whom he had not seen create anything out of nothing, he transferred allegiance to the devil, and is therefore, under bondage to Satan, needing a redeemer.


    Therefore, every human being after him had a will that is 'sold under sin', as Paul describes himself, 'conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity and estranged from the womb, speaking lies' as David said, with a heart 'whose imagination is evil from his youth', a heart that is deceitful above all things' like Jeremiah said, living but dead as Paul states in Ephesians 2:1, and even at his 'best state is altogether vanity.'

    That is why if we must be saved, if we must repent as God calls us to, if we need to believe in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and call on Him, God must first intervene, regenerate us, and then enable us.

    And he does so for His people, without a doubt.

    Others, He simply leaves to the consequence of their fallen nature, culminating in judgment and eternal damnation.
     
  7. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1

    Ok, keep that in mind when studying I Cor 2. [​IMG]


    So if I'm understanding you correctly you believe that men are made to irresistably desire and follow Christ as their Lord and Savior but God then leaves the "deep" things" up to them to decide for themselves as they read and see God's revelation of Himself? Is that it in a nutshell?

    So, God is sovereign when it comes to salvation but he is not when it comes to understanding his Word? Isn't that contradictory? He works despite men's will to bring them salvation, but then leaves it up to their will in regard to doctrine? Is that right?

    Please explain further if that is not what you believe.

    Thanks for your demeanor in our discussions. It is a pleasure. [​IMG]
     
  8. Southern

    Southern New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skan,
    My post on God not revealing everything to us answers your question. So when you ask if it is contradictory for God to bring His people to eternal life (understanding the gospel) and not giving them perfect understanding does not contradict itself from my standpoint. We are not promised perfection until glory (Rom. 8:29). God has not chosen to make us perfect yet. I leave that up to Him and I look forward to it one day! Amen? [​IMG]

    God bless
     
  9. Ian Major

    Ian Major New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skandelon said
    Now that is a straw man. I never said or even implied that God doesn't intervene in the lives of men, especially in the lives of believers. He intervenes all the time which affects our will and we are responsible for our response to his interventions in our life. Having free will does'nt in any way negate the use of means. The means are used BECAUSE we have free will. Signs and wonders were used to persuade men....jealousy was used to provoke men....parables were used to keep outsiders in the dark....all means to deal with men's will which is why the teaching of such means flies in the face of a doctrine such as yours that really doesn't need any means.

    You accept that God does intervene - but you deny it is to MAKE us more holy, rather it is merely to encourage us to be so.

    God certainly encourages us to holiness, but if He left it there, what control would He have of the Church's survival? Does He not raise men and women up to be examples of holiness; to be filled with the Spirit; to do exploits for Him? Is it chance God depends on, the maybe/maybe not of our weakness?

    No, God allows us to struggle with sin; some He even kills in discipline; but as and when He determines, we are advanced in holiness and understanding, by the reviving work of His Spirit. It,like His work in our salvation, is a sovereign, unpredictable work. The Wind blows where It wants. The gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church - He will keep us from forsaking Him. We are His slaves now, He makes us to walk in the paths of righteousness.

    You make it seem as if "enlightenment" must be something more than God Himself in the flesh speaking with a human tongue, and writing it on paper for us to read for ourselves, and sending men all over the world to speak it clearly to us in our own language. That sounds pretty "enlightening" to me! What more did you want him to do to "enlighten" us?

    Here's an example of enlightenment requiring more than the words of the gospel:
    John 8: 43Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do.

    And that even believers need the Spirit's aid to understand the word:
    Eph.1: 15 Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers: 17that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power 20which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come.

    Whose fault is that? Isn't that the responsiblity of the one passing out the "enlightenment". If he has chosen not to enlighten some then how could they ever become a Calvinist? And why wouldn't he choose to enlighten everyone to this "truth?"

    Whose 'fault' is it we are not perfectly holy? Ours. But is God obliged to make us so now? No. Likewise with our knowledge. It is of His MERCY and GRACE we have anything. Why didn't He give us more understanding than He did? - He doesn't say. He is not obliged to. But we can ask Him for more holiness, more understanding - that is pleasing in His sight.

    Are you disputing these men's salvation? Do you dispute my salvation? If not, then my point has been made. If so, then we have another debate on our hands.

    I only know you from your posts, and your error is not enough for me to doubt your salvation. Regarding Wesley and Graham, I do have grounds for real doubts. As well as there lives, there is the solemn word of our Lord Jesus in Matt.7: 21 "Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' 23And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

    In Him

    Ian
     
  10. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ok, so we both agree that we aren't going to be perfect until we get to heaven. I'm fine with that. The reason I believe I'm not perfect is because I make bad choices despite God's direction and influence in my life. The reason I believe the wrong doctrine here or there is because I make mistakes. What do you believe?

    If you agree with me then I must ask, "HOW?" How can God maintain His "sovereignty" if you are the one who is determining the level of your holiness or obedience to Him? Is He allowing you to make choices in regard to your obedience as a believer? If so, why do you believe it would be against the sovereignty of God for a lost man to choose to believe? Do you see the contradiction?
     
  11. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, if you mean that I don't believe that God irresistably causes Holiness, I agree, which is evidenced in the fact that not every believer lives Holy lives. Nor does every believer come to the same level of Holiness as others do. Now this is either because

    (1) Men make bad choices and disobey God's direction and inflence.

    OR

    (2) God is failing to make some as Holy as others.

    OR

    (3) God doesn't want every believer to be that Holy.

    I don't think you want to pick option 2 or 3 do you?

    No one here is trying to say that God is not in control or that He could intervene in any way necessary to accomplish His ultimate purposes, for example the church's survival. He uses weak vessels to accomplish His purposes I agree and I never have argued that He would leave sovereign issues up to the "maybe/maybe nots" of human weakness. But the real question is what is considered a sovereign issue and what is God's desire that is left up to the volition of others (still while under his oversight)?



    First, I do believe that full enlightenment, or understanding of the deep spiritual truths of God, requires more than the words of the scripture. The comfort and guidance of the Holy Spirit gives us, as believers, insight and truth which is what 1 Cor. 2 is speaking about..."the deep things of God."

    Second, in regard to John 8... why isn't Jesus' audience able to listen? Is it because they were born that way and aren't elect? Or is it because they have continually rebelled against God and now have been hardened? Read John 12:39 and I think you will find your answer. Do they still have hope of salvation? Read Romans 11 (especially verse 14) and I think you will see that they still do have hope.

    No disagreement here. The question is why don't some understand as much as others apparently do? Is it because of the choices of the men or because of the choices of God?

    You and I both want to understand more about God and His Word don't we? We could look at dozens of men throughout history who have longed to understand the things of God. We spend hours here on this board for that very reason, but the fact of the matter is that we all come to differing conclusions. Even among Calvinists there are numerous doctrinal difference as there are within Arminian groups. WHY? Has God failed in teaching some and not others? Or has he just chosen to teach some the wrong things? If its not men's doing then the errors must be of God. See my point? You cannot remove men's role without compromising God's Holiness and perfection.
     
  12. Southern

    Southern New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skan,
    You said:
    Ok, so we both agree that we aren't going to be perfect until we get to heaven. I'm fine with that. The reason I believe I'm not perfect is because I make bad choices despite God's direction and influence in my life. The reason I believe the wrong doctrine here or there is because I make mistakes. What do you believe?

    Me:Yes, I agree with basically everything you stated but my "error" in theology still fits under the label "God's Soveriegnty".

    you:If you agree with me then I must ask, "HOW?" How can God maintain His "sovereignty" if you are the one who is determining the level of your holiness or obedience to Him?

    Me:The Scriptures affirm the reality of human participation in God's purposes, but not on the same level with God. Our "participation" is subordinate to His. Even "sin" serves God's purposes which I hope you would agree. Even my "error" serves God's purposes in this life. Why God allows what He does is totally up to Him. I just know that I will not be perfect in theology until glory. Then me and you will probably agree on everything, and can worship God together and thank Him for the wonderful gift of salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord!

    You:Is He allowing you to make choices in regard to your obedience as a believer? If so, why do you believe it would be against the sovereignty of God for a lost man to choose to believe? Do you see the contradiction?

    Me:No, I do not see a contradiction at all. Look at my above explanation. I believe that God is sovereign over all these things whether it be my wrong choices or me being lost and not choosing to believe, it serves God's purpose and fits under the term "sovereignty".


    God bless
     
  13. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, one day when we are all in heaven God is going to sit us all down and explain it all....by the way, He has personally asked me to assist in this process. ;)

    You:Is He allowing you to make choices in regard to your obedience as a believer? If so, why do you believe it would be against the sovereignty of God for a lost man to choose to believe? Do you see the contradiction?

    Me:No, I do not see a contradiction at all. Look at my above explanation. I believe that God is sovereign over all these things whether it be my wrong choices or me being lost and not choosing to believe, it serves God's purpose and fits under the term "sovereignty".

    The contradiction is with those who try to claim that God somehow would be giving up his sovereignity by giving us a real choice in salvation. That is clearly contradicted by the fact that we can choose our different doctrines. God's sovereignity obviously allows for diversity among believers as they make their own choices (for his purposes, I agree) which would indicate that God could also allow diversity in men before they are saved as they make their own choices. Calvinists are always asking what is the difference between those who don't choose Christ and those who do and if you can tell me the difference in those who choose Calvinism and those who don't then you'll have your answer. The will of man is the difference, not God's determination.
     
  14. Ian Major

    Ian Major New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skandelon said
    Yes, if you mean that I don't believe that God irresistably causes Holiness, I agree, which is evidenced in the fact that not every believer lives Holy lives. Nor does every believer come to the same level of Holiness as others do.

    But that doesn't rule out Him irresistibly advancing any Christian, at any time. That is what I'm arguing for, not for Him doing so for everyone the same.

    Now this is either because
    (1) Men make bad choices and disobey God's direction and inflence. OR
    (2) God is failing to make some as Holy as others. OR
    (3) God doesn't want every believer to be that Holy.
    I don't think you want to pick option 2 or 3 do you?

    Actually, it is 1 AND 3. We have our sinful part, but it is subject to His sovereign will. His non-enforced will is that we all be completely holy; His sovereign will is to bring that slowly to pass, in different degrees, in each of us.

    No one here is trying to say that God is not in control or that He could intervene in any way necessary to accomplish His ultimate purposes, for example the church's survival. He uses weak vessels to accomplish His purposes I agree and I never have argued that He would leave sovereign issues up to the "maybe/maybe nots" of human weakness. But the real question is what is considered a sovereign issue and what is God's desire that is left up to the volition of others (still while under his oversight)?

    It is wrong to make it an either/or between human volition and God's sovereign will. His sovereign will determines what our volition is; we will do good to please Him, or we will be left to our sinful nature to do bad, but that will also be a fulfilment of His sovereign will. ALL issues are sovereign.

    Second, in regard to John 8... why isn't Jesus' audience able to listen? Is it because they were born that way and aren't elect? Or is it because they have continually rebelled against God and now have been hardened? Read John 12:39 and I think you will find your answer. Do they still have hope of salvation? Read Romans 11 (especially verse 14) and I think you will see that they still do have hope.

    Certainly the Jews were judicially hardened. But does that mean the Gentiles are able of themselves to understand the gospel? No, for they too are of their father the devil. As to the duration of the Jews' hardening, it is to be until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. The Jews who repent are also lost Christ-rejectors - but they are the elect, those of Israel God has reserved for Himself while He condemned the rest to judgement. When the fulness of the Gentiles has come in, all Israel will consist solely of the elect.


    You and I both want to understand more about God and His Word don't we? We could look at dozens of men throughout history who have longed to understand the things of God. We spend hours here on this board for that very reason, but the fact of the matter is that we all come to differing conclusions. Even among Calvinists there are numerous doctrinal difference as there are within Arminian groups. WHY? Has God failed in teaching some and not others? Or has he just chosen to teach some the wrong things? If its not men's doing then the errors must be of God. See my point? You cannot remove men's role without compromising God's Holiness and perfection.

    No, God has not failed. Nor does He teach errors. Men teach errors. As I've shown above, man does have a role - but just as in salvation, all righteous decisions come because God has caused us to choose that way. Without him we can do nothing .

    In Him

    Ian
     
  15. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    But that doesn't answer the question as to why some advance much further in much less time etc. If God is the only factor determining the rate at which one progresses then why do some remain on the milk of the word their entire lives while Paul rebukes them for it? Face it Ian, you can't completely exclude men's responsive role in this process.

    Ok, so what your saying is that its really a part of God's will that you have come so much further in your understanding of doctrine than I have come? Right? Why do you suppose that is?

    You just redifined volition to mean what God wills instead of what it mean which is that we have a will. Sovereignty doesn't have to mean that God causes or determines our will, it could simply mean that our wills won't ever overtake or subvert His sovereign will.

    Three things:

    1. Yes it does mean the Gentiles are able to do something the harden Jews can't do. They can hear, see, understand and repent. Read Acts 28:21-28 especially verse 28.

    2. Its not something they (the Gentiles) do "of themselves" in that God plays no part. Remember that I have always maintained that absent of God's intervention we all would be without hope. God does intervene through the means he has actually revealed to us in the scripture.

    3. Yes they are "of their father the devil" but that is not the real reason Jesus' audience couldn't recieve his words. Look at the text:

    John 8: 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do.

    Notice the question. "Why do you not understand my speech?" The answer is, "Because you are not able to listen to My word." We know from other passages that the Gentiles are able (Acts 28:28). After the question is answered Jesus continues with an explaination of their natural condition which they are still in because of first their own rebellion in the face of God's clear revelations and second God's judicial hardening of them to seal them in that unblief. He never says that they are not able to understand his speech because they were born as a child of the devil. We are all born children of the devil and therefore cannot understand the God's word unless we are of God. Only one has been "of God" and that one was Christ, who didn't stay in heaven to leave us in ignorance. He came and spoke truth in our tongue for us to hear, see, understand and believe. Men's natural condition without Christ is hopeless, but we are talking about men's natural condition once confronted by Christ and his message of the cross, something which at this time had not been accomplished.

    That is one way to look at it but it seems to do injustice to the whole of the text to me. I prefer the view of this scholar:

    Again, Ian we also believe that "without him we can do nothing and we give him the credit for revealing truth to us and thus we can rightly say we have nothing he didn't reveal or give to us. Just because something isn't given by God irresistable doesn't mean its not still of God. If all righteous decisions come because God caused the choice irresistably then why call believers to make righteous choices, rebuke them when they don't and reward them when they do as God clearly does? Its a system without responders which makes scripture into pure nonsense and even our discussions here non sensisical because if you believe that only God can "cause" me to make the right decision in regard to soteriology why are you wasting your time. Its not like I don't already know your doctrine, I used to convert Arminians to Calvinism during the 10 years or so that I held to it. If you are the "means" of coversion for me and you never succeed then has God failed or have you? If your not the "means" from God then your wasting time, right?
     
  16. Ian Major

    Ian Major New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skandelon said
    But that doesn't answer the question as to why some advance much further in much less time etc. If God is the only factor determining the rate at which one progresses then why do some remain on the milk of the word their entire lives while Paul rebukes them for it? Face it Ian, you can't completely exclude men's responsive role in this process.

    Firstly, I don't rule out man's response - we must respond, little or much, to God's command. But that response is under His sovereign will; it is not a shared determining will.

    Secondly, God can rightly blame us for any sinful neglect in our sanctification, even if He has determined not to cause us to overcome in that.

    It must be noted, however, that lack of maturity is not in itself sinful, only what is neglect by us. God does not require of us to know even as we are known, to understand all mysteries, etc. That will come on our glorification.

    Ok, so what your saying is that its really a part of God's will that you have come so much further in your understanding of doctrine than I have come? Right? Why do you suppose that is?

    Right. I don't know, just as I don't know why others know more than me. He gives gifts to men as He sees fit. A measure of faith to each, etc. It is certainly not because I am better than another - it is all of His grace.

    You just redifined volition to mean what God wills instead of what it mean which is that we have a will. Sovereignty doesn't have to mean that God causes or determines our will, it could simply mean that our wills won't ever overtake or subvert His sovereign will.

    No, I have not redefined volition. Man still has a will, it is just that God causes that will to decide according to His pleasure. We are not dragged to act against our will.

    I see what you are saying about conditional freedom of the will - that it is free to do anything, except whatever God has determined otherwise. Like in the inanimate world, if we said God does not determine whether a grain of sand rolls to the left or right down a sand dune. Some people hold that it doesn't effect anything, so God's sovereignty need not be involved.

    But I disagree. Even the grain of sand has a purpose and an effect. The sparrow cannot fall without His permission. Much more so concerning the moral affairs of man. All have an impact; all will be accounted for.



    1. Yes it does mean the Gentiles are able to do something the harden Jews can't do. They can hear, see, understand and repent. Read Acts 28:21-28 especially verse 28.

    I had said, 'of themselves'. You read verse 28 and draw from it that the Gentiles of themselves are able to beleive. But the text actually says, "Therefore let it be known to you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it!" Nothing about inate ability. Rather it is about the sovereign detremination of God, that He would give Christ a people from among the Gentiles - not a maybe, but a certainty. It was not possible that the Gentiles would exercise their free-will and refuse Him. No, those whom He had appointed to eternal life from among the Gentiles would believe, Acts 13: 48Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

    Notice the question. "Why do you not understand my speech?" The answer is, "Because you are not able to listen to My word." We know from other passages that the Gentiles are able (Acts 28:28). After the question is answered Jesus continues with an explaination of their natural condition which they are still in because of first their own rebellion in the face of God's clear revelations and second God's judicial hardening of them to seal them in that unblief. He never says that they are not able to understand his speech because they were born as a child of the devil. We are all born children of the devil and therefore cannot understand the God's word unless we are of God. Only one has been "of God" and that one was Christ, who didn't stay in heaven to leave us in ignorance. He came and spoke truth in our tongue for us to hear, see, understand and believe. Men's natural condition without Christ is hopeless, but we are talking about men's natural condition once confronted by Christ and his message of the cross, something which at this time had not been accomplished.

    My explanation of Acts 28:28 above refutes your assertion on natural ability. So the reason for their inability to hear stands, namely, being of the father the devil.

    "until the Gentiles have had their full time of the visible Church all to themselves while the Jews are out, which the Jews had till the Gentiles were brought in." (See Luke 21:24).

    A very confused commentator, or you are confused as to his meaning. I think the latter may be the case, for he is pointing out the 'fulness of the Gentiles' is the period of Gentile predominance in the Church and Gentile dominion over Jerusalem, something still active today. Yes, the hardening remains on Israel even as we speak.

    If all righteous decisions come because God caused the choice irresistably then why call believers to make righteous choices, rebuke them when they don't and reward them when they do as God clearly does? Its a system without responders which makes scripture into pure nonsense and even our discussions here non sensisical because if you believe that only God can "cause" me to make the right decision in regard to soteriology why are you wasting your time. Its not like I don't already know your doctrine, I used to convert Arminians to Calvinism during the 10 years or so that I held to it. If you are the "means" of coversion for me and you never succeed then has God failed or have you? If your not the "means" from God then your wasting time, right?

    My wrong decisions are of me, not God, therefore He can properly rebuke me. MUST He cause me to make them all right? No, He is free to progress my sanctification as He chooses.

    I'm not wasting my time in exhorting the brethren or evangelising the lost. This is the means God uses to accomplish His ends, whether it is of further condemnation of the rebellious or their recovery or edification of His people. It is all to His glory.


    If you are not 'converted', it is neither God nor me to blame - it will be YOU.

    Yes, if I were not the means of God, I would be wasting my time - but I am His means, for one result or the other.

    In Him

    Ian
     
  17. ILUVLIGHT

    ILUVLIGHT Guest

    Hi Ian;
    I disagree Ian Calvinist say that the Natural man can't hear. This verse says they will at least the Gentiles. Act 28:28.
    This verse says everyone will understand. That everyone who is made by God.
    Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
    May God Bless You;
    Mike [​IMG]
     
  18. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    (for simplicity all my words will remain in bold)

    Firstly, I don't rule out man's response - we must respond, little or much, to God's command. But that response is under His sovereign will; it is not a shared determining will.

    Then its not a response from us, it is actually His doing. That is not a response. A response requires two persons and you only have one doing anything in this case. If I jumped out in front of someone and yelled "BOO!" and then entered in side their body and jumped in fright, then its not their response. It takes two beings for a response to be a response.

    Secondly, God can rightly blame us for any sinful neglect in our sanctification, even if He has determined not to cause us to overcome in that.

    My point is that "He has given us EVERYTHING that we need for a life of Godliness by the power of Him who calls us to his own glory and goodness." We have the power to overcome. If we don't, its not because He has somehow failed to give us what we needed, because He has given us everything we need it is left to us to respond.

    Ok, so what your saying is that its really a part of God's will that you have come so much further in your understanding of doctrine than I have come? Right? Why do you suppose that is?

    Right. I don't know, just as I don't know why others know more than me. He gives gifts to men as He sees fit. A measure of faith to each, etc. It is certainly not because I am better than another - it is all of His grace.

    So, then you must admit that the ONLY reason I am not a Calvinist is because God hasn't made me as able or as willing as he did you, right?

    You just redifined volition to mean what God wills instead of what it mean which is that we have a will. Sovereignty doesn't have to mean that God causes or determines our will, it could simply mean that our wills won't ever overtake or subvert His sovereign will.

    No, I have not redefined volition. Man still has a will, it is just that God causes that will to decide according to His pleasure. We are not dragged to act against our will.

    I see what you are saying about conditional freedom of the will - that it is free to do anything, except whatever God has determined otherwise. Like in the inanimate world, if we said God does not determine whether a grain of sand rolls to the left or right down a sand dune. Some people hold that it doesn't effect anything, so God's sovereignty need not be involved.

    But I disagree. Even the grain of sand has a purpose and an effect. The sparrow cannot fall without His permission. Much more so concerning the moral affairs of man. All have an impact; all will be accounted for.

    I never said God's sovereignty wouldn't be involved in the small things. I don't think their is one molecule out from under the sovereignty of God. My point was that God Sovereignty could still allow for choice in that God would only intervene when needed to protect and perserve his ultimate purpose. If the grain of sand falling could subvert his plan He would keep it from falling, if it doesn't then its left free to fall. I believe its God's purpose to allow men to choose freely who they will serve and therefore has not been determined by His sovereign will. Therefore, men are free to fall and because of Christ's work they are also free to repent and be forgiven.

    I had said, 'of themselves'. You read verse 28 and draw from it that the Gentiles of themselves are able to beleive.

    No, as I have continually stated, we are not saved "of ourselves." They are not able unless God intervenes. This verse is showing His intervention and thus their ability to hear.

    But the text actually says, "Therefore let it be known to you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it!" Nothing about inate ability.

    But look at the context Ian. It is contrasting the Jews, who cannot see, hear or understand with the Gentiles who apparently can. Why? Let look at this indepth Ian:

    The Jews hearts have been disposed to unbelief because of their pasts and now because of God's purposes. The Gentiles don't have that disposition. They are "ripe" for picking because they don't have the false teachings and self-righteous pride getting in the way. Its a matter of disposition, which goes right along with Acts 13:48 which speaks of those being disposed, or their hearts being open, to repentance
    .

    My explanation of Acts 28:28 above refutes your assertion on natural ability. So the reason for their inability to hear stands, namely, being of the father the devil.

    Your explanation didn't look at the entire context of the passage. If I said to you, "Nick is impossible to get along with and he seems so angry all the time; I think he has some anger issues he needs to deal with, if he dealt with them I think he would be a nice guy, but now he just doesn't listen. So I will go to Ian, because he's a nice guy." Wouldn't you understand that I was contrasting you and Nick? Would you assume that Nick's bad attitude and anger was also describing you, or would you assume they were opposite of characteristic that you portray? Obviously, I would be contrasting you two as Paul is doing with the Jews and the Gentiles. If the Gentiles were in the same condition as the Jews what would be his point here?

    A very confused commentator, or you are confused as to his meaning. I think the latter may be the case, for he is pointing out the 'fulness of the Gentiles' is the period of Gentile predominance in the Church and Gentile dominion over Jerusalem, something still active today. Yes, the hardening remains on Israel even as we speak.

    I honestly don't see how you could think that considering all that is said in the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks of these who have stumbled and who are hardened "leaving their unbelief" and "being saved" after being "provoked." A judicially hardened man cannot leave his unbelief and be saved unless the hardened was lifted. Clearly God was lifting his hardening as he was provoking them to envy. (This doesn't mean that Jews still may be more prone to refuse Christs teachings because of their upbringing and their history, but that is a matter of their own choosing, not God's hardening.)

    If all righteous decisions come because God caused the choice irresistably then why call believers to make righteous choices, rebuke them when they don't and reward them when they do as God clearly does? Its a system without responders which makes scripture into pure nonsense and even our discussions here non sensisical because if you believe that only God can "cause" me to make the right decision in regard to soteriology why are you wasting your time. Its not like I don't already know your doctrine, I used to convert Arminians to Calvinism during the 10 years or so that I held to it. If you are the "means" of coversion for me and you never succeed then has God failed or have you? If your not the "means" from God then your wasting time, right?

    If you are not 'converted', it is neither God nor me to blame - it will be YOU.

    Why? According to you the only one who could cause me to believe Calvinism is God. If I become a Calvinist again it will be because of God and Him alone, right? So, its only reasonable to believe that if I don't become a Calvinist it is because of God and Him alone. You can't blame the fall or imputed sinfulness for this one Ian. As a believer I have been set free. If your system is right only God can be blamed for people not becoming Calvinistic. Which btw is why many Calvinists do believe such choices are left up to men.
     
  19. Ian Major

    Ian Major New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    ILUVLIGHT said
    I disagree Ian Calvinist say that the Natural man can't hear. This verse says they will at least the Gentiles. Act 28:28.

    Your statement is incoherent: 'cant't' and 'will' are not the same. The verse says Gentiles will, so what does that tell us about their natural ability? Nothing. It only tells us some Gentiles are going to repent. The mechanism must be found in other texts, such as Acts 13:48 - God had appointed them to it.

    This verse says everyone will understand. That everyone who is made by God. Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

    Brother, it says all men understand there is a God to whom they are accountable, and that they are without excuse. We agree on that. But it says nothing about their ability to repent and obey. In fact, the context tells us that NONE of them do; that all men refuse nature's light. Only the gospel coming in the power of the Spirit can save any. That's what the Great Commission is all about - the salvation of a great number throughout the world, folk whom neither nature's light nor God's Law could change.

    In Him

    Ian
     
  20. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Look at the passage. It tells us the inability of the Jews and then says "BUT THE GENTILES WILL HEAR." How could that mean anything else but that there is a difference in their ability at this point in time? If it were about the elect and the non-elect of each group then why would he draw the lines between the Jews and Gentiles and not just come out and say the elect and the non-elect? Why not say, "the non-elect can't see, hear, understand, but the elect will listen?"

    First, this text NEVER says God appointed them indivdually as if to the neglect of other Gentiles. We have been over this one.

    Who says "NONE" of them have faith? Job had faith, as did Rahab and many others mentioned in scripture. None of them was righteous by the standards of the law, and none of them meet up to God's standard of righteousness as revealed to that point BUT verse 21 speaks of a righteousness now being revealed through faith. "Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness." Everyone who had faith in God, either through God's revelation in nature or God's revelation through the law, was credited with righteousness, eventhough they themselves were not righteous by the standards of the law.
     
Loading...