Calvinistic Application Part 2

Of course I don’t agree with your “Determinist” view of election. And I’m already aware of the Calvinist view of common grace which holds to the reasoning of maintaining general morality. This is where I would think you should realize the intent in “your” definition. I’m am more interested in of whether or not your view the intent being a genuine offer of salvation for all who receive your brand of common grace; it logically does not. So the paraphrased quote I gave of, “Grace is no longer grace, if it does not include the saving intent of the Giver” is contingent on the word “saving” for the full meaning of intent. The Calvinist’ intent in common grace, as far as I know, does not believe it is sufficient for salvation. It believes there is a “special” grace for that that one. Seems you’re trying to have it both ways.

As for the old argument of whether the Gospel is offered to all men and how, I’ll not get started on that one, there are plenty of treads about this already. I will just state how I see it:

If a man received your brand of common grace with a genuine intent to save, and prayed to know God, would God not send him all (whatsoever) he needed regardless of where he was at or how many churches where around the corner? I believe He would; I believe that promise of intent is in His Word,

 

Lets be clear. The intent is two-fold. CG is meant to point men to God. They should seek God out from what they find in common grace. But we also know not just from our life, and others around us, but from the words of the Bible that men do not seek God. We also know going by Romans 1, that man will change what God has given them to know of him, into a lie following their own lust of sin. We also know that he came unto his own and his own rejected him.

Its called a SINFUL will. The very will that many want to left up as only just for God to allow is the problem. God has allowed man a will, but it is controlled by sin. God must overpower our will and bring us to Christ.

Therefore election.

The 2nd intent is to leave man with no excuse. I'm sure you know the verses here.

 

There is only one salvation my friend, either your definition of God's grace includes the intent of salvation or it does not.

As far as I see my quote holds:

“Grace is no longer grace, if it does not include the saving intent of the Giver”

I'm not going to chase all these rabbits, the point was about common grave and the intent to save. I can't resist leaving you with a few verses tho:


(Deu 4:29) But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.

(1Ch 16:11) Seek the LORD and his strength, seek his face continually.

(1Ch 16:12) Remember his marvelous works that he hath done, his wonders, and the judgments of his mouth;

(1Ch 22:19) Now set your heart and your soul to seek the LORD your God; arise therefore, and build ye the sanctuary of the LORD God, to bring the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and the holy vessels of God, into the house that is to be built to the name of the LORD.

(1Ch 28:9) And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off forever.

(2Ch 11:16) And after them out of all the tribes of Israel such as set their hearts to seek the LORD God of Israel came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the LORD God of their fathers.

(2Ch 12:14) And he did evil, because he prepared not his heart to seek the LORD.


(2Ch 15:2) And he went out to meet Asa, and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin; The LORD is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye seek him, he will be found of you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you.

(2Ch 15:12) And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul;

(2Ch 15:13) That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.

(2Ch 30:18) For a multitude of the people, even many of Ephraim, and Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise than it was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, The good LORD pardon every one

(2Ch 30:19) That prepareth his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary.

(Ezr 7:10) For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments.

(Psa 14:2) The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

(Psa 22:26) The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live forever.

(Psa 27:4) One thing have I desired of the LORD, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the LORD, and to inquire in his temple.

(Psa 27:8) When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said unto thee, Thy face, LORD, will I seek.

(Psa 34:10) The young lions do lack, and suffer hunger: but they that seek the LORD shall not want any good thing.

(Psa 40:16) Let all those that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee: let such as love thy salvation say continually, The LORD be magnified.

(Psa 69:6) Let not them that wait on thee, O Lord GOD of hosts, be ashamed for my sake: let not those that seek thee be confounded for my sake, O God of Israel.

(Psa 83:16) Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O LORD.

(Psa 105:3) Glory ye in his holy name: let the heart of them rejoice that seek the LORD.

(Psa 105:4) Seek the LORD, and his strength: seek his face evermore.

(Pro 28:5) Evil men understand not judgment: but they that seek the LORD understand all things.


(Isa 55:6) Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:

(Hos 10:12) Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap in mercy; break up your fallow ground: for it is time to seek the LORD, till he come and rain righteousness upon you.

(Amo 5:4) For thus saith the LORD unto the house of Israel, Seek ye me, and ye shall live:

(Amo 5:6) Seek the LORD, and ye shall live; lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph, and devour it, and there be none to quench it in Bethel.

(Amo 5:14) Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken.


(Zep 2:3) Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD's anger.


(Act 15:17) That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

(Act 17:27) That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

 

I'm not sure how better to say it. You look at verses that talk about saving grace and you feel all Grace is saving?

Mankind can give grace to others, but mankind does not save. It is Gods grace that I have a computer, for all blessings come from God. But having a computer does not save.

It is common grace that we enjoy art. God could have made the whole world with just straight lines, but God gave us curves. Curves will not save us Ben.

Now I have answered many questions. I also understand you don't like my answers. But I have not dodged what you ask. I answered straight forward.

Now please answer this.

I'm sure you agree that if you have a car, that the car you have is a blessing given by Gods grace. Non-believers also have cars, also by the grace of God. Knowing this is the case, will you say that this grace shown to you in this blessing will save the unbeliever?

 

I had to cut some of your verses in order to post this. For others wanting to see Ben's full list, please look above this post, to Ben's last posting.

Now my post...
No one denies that God calls all me to seek him. No one denies that God has planted in mankind elements that point to a living God and that man should take those God given elements and seek God. I agree and you agree. The Bible welcomes, all men to salvation. It's the Bible....just read you r verses above.


Now will you agree with me that this too is the Bible...

Please do not take us off the trail by posting 1 or two verses that only SEEM to render this verse I lie, because then we would have to spend time showing that those verses must be seen in their context.

All I'm asking is....do you agree that God tells man to seek him (your verses)...but also God says man will not seek him? Do you agree with the Bible?

 

First off, I’ll ask you to refrain from presenting this type of “do you agree with the Bible” question. From it I can only infer a few things, such as: that you believe you or your interpretations “are” the Bible and anyone that disagrees with you they are being non-biblical, or that you are questioning my faith and belief in His Word, or I might even start to think that you are willing to use the same tactics as the Liar, the Devil himself, who told the Lord Jesus “for it is written” as he attempted to sway our Lord… and this, for no better reason than because I do not agree with your systematic theoretical boxing.

James, you need to recognize and acknowledge that I am not a Calvinist/Determinist/Predestinarian, whatever you want to call it. Your getting into "depravity"; I’ll let you in on a little secret; I used to have a little Calvinist blood in me, yep, I was a ½ T-pointer at one time, but don’t tell anyone. You see, I actually thought the Calvinist had Total Depravity half right, but I’ve since put that misnomer behind me; my perception of man’s Depravity differs from the Calvinist’ in too many ways to even give them ½ point. You are jumping into the T,U and I on me, and I have no desire to begin scriptural food fights and circular arguments. So let’s just cut to the chase; I recognize where you are coming from and think you are certainly up to at least acknowledging, for fair and comprehensible debate, that we have different views to begin with. It does no good for you to start a systematic lecture on your view because I do not have the time to address every issue as you bring them up and it only results in a smoke screen and confusing the issue.

Now we would both agree, I believe, that man can not come to God unless called. This is where your view of God’s grace goes into distinguishing between common grace and special grace. Calvinism teaches that special grace alone is saving grace and that it is extended only to the elect and is irresistible. I understand that view, but don’t agree with it…Okay?

In my view a better term would be “Common Sufficient Grace”. Grace flows from the Father’s self-giving love for all of lost humanity (John 3:16-18), mediated through the Son, administered by the Holy Spirit, available because of the finished work of the Son which is a cause of conviction to all:


(John 16:8) And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

(John 16:9) Of sin, because they believe not on me;

(John 16:10) Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;

(John 16:11) Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

What you see as a common grace which brings a general morality, I see as an ongoing ministry of the Holy Spirit to convict men of their sins and unbelief. Where we differ is that you believe in a second grace/or special grace only given to the elect where I believe Christ brought sufficient light into the world to illuminate every person.

(John 1:9) That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.


While everyone may not receive the same amount of light, those that are not saved will be rejected on the bases of whatever amount of light they did receive. This is the love spoken of in John 3:16 and also the perfect work and promises prophesied of a loving and just God rains on all:


(Deuteronomy 32:1) Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.

(Deuteronomy 32:2) My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distill as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:

(Deuteronomy 32:3) Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.

(Deuteronomy 32:4) He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

The conviction which comes to all men (which your view separates off as general morality/1st of a two fold grace) [I find that kind of weird BTW, like a two salvation doctrine] is due to Christ’ finished work and is sufficient grace for all men:

(John 12:32) And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

(Titus 2:11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

The “judgment” of God is in truth unto “all” men through conviction in the act of the Son, given in the light that came into the whole world:

(Romans 2:2) But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

(Romans 2:3) And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

(Romans 2:4) Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

To recap, I believe there is a common grace (a light) which is sufficient for all men to come to repentance and which is only available upon belief, not special selection or special grace as Calvinism’s declarations while systematically fitting T, U and I, into a second type of grace.

 

You mean that James thinks his position is biblical. And of course he thinks his view is biblical. You also think your understanding is biblical.

Their sin condemns them to perdition.

The light that someone receives is the same as the love spoken of in John 3:16?! Hardly. The love in John 3:16 is salvific. The light of nature and the testimony in the heart is not.

The justice of God evidenced in sending rain to the just and unjust alike is certainly not to be equated to the love found in John 3:16.

I haven't the time to make any more comments.

 

Jesus died for the sins of the "Whole world", that included those who do go to hell, that they "MIGHT BE" saved because God isn't willing for "ANY" to perish.

1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Now let me ask you something,

How much "DISREPECT" would be shown to Jesus's suffering/dying for these sins/sinner if God failed to do his part to save them???

That is an "Effectual calling/Grace" to "SOME", but not "ALL"???

Calvin's doctrine drives a wedge between the "intent" of Jesus's mission to save the whole world and God's intentions of not saving "ALL".

Do you think this "division" exit between Jesus/God???

 

Hi Benjamin;
Post 46 was an out standing post with which I agree.
MB

 

2nd....Do you not think I have read the 100 verses you posted and know they are in the Bible? If you give only one side, you have not studied the Bible. Don't be upset if I ask if you believe the full Bible when you only post one aspect of God.

I call it Calvinism or doctrines of grace. You call it the other things. You said you don't like it when someone says doctrines of grace. Believe you me, I have never thought you as a Calvinist. Why do you think I do?

I'm replying to your list of verses on seeking God (which you dodged).

.
That is bugus Ben. 1/2 is not total. You are total or not.

It was you that posted the verses..I replied.

I have addressed each post head on...while you keep saying..."I don't want to go there". when I ask you something. :BangHead:

You mean you are going to ask something else? Ok...

I have never said other wise

OK...and do you think it does me good to hear the same verses quoted that I know of and have read, yet you leave out the others and .."don't want to go there"? This is like putting your head in the sand.

.
I believe this...Yes

I understand your view. The reason you believe this, is because you will not talk about the other verses

I have no idea why you are telling me this. I know what we both believe. But why is it that you do not want to debate it on a debate thread?????


And then list more verses....but will not talk about my verses.

:laugh:

Head...sand...
these words mean anything to you?

 

The atonement is a act of Love.......

What about Cain?

 

You have ran with this verse for over a month now, posting it time and time again. Each time you bold "MIGHT BE".

Is this your point? Are you saying "might" here is used as in possible? It does seem like this is what you are trying to force on the word. Am I right?

 

Yes, An "Act" demonstrated "TOWARD" the whole world, "ALL MEN".

Ro 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

When you say Jesus bought and paid for a free gift for all men, but God, by his will, withhold that free gift from "SOME MEN",

you put a wedge between God and Jesus.

The "Free Gift" is offered by God/Jesus to "ALL MEN", but all men won't accept it, that's not God/Jesus fault, nor their will, that's man's fault,

On the other side, those who do accept it by "FAITH", receive it.

Man does have the choice, accept/reject it. (belief/unbelief)

If God doesn't so much as tempt man to sin, he certainly isn't going to predestine man to sin.

All sin belongs to man, not God.

 

That is the one statement I've heard the most from "Calvinist".

But do you know what is wrong with it???

God could have created "robots" in the beginning and no one would be lost, not any perish according to God's will,

So why didn't God just create robot and forgo all the repenting he made man and "Striving" with man to save him???

There a reason behind God allowing Satan to tempt Adam/Eve/mankind, a reason that doesn't exit in Calvin's doctrine, and consequently, can't be explained.

The point in scripture missed is that man can't force God to love him, and neither can God force man to love him.

Ro 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

"LOVE" can only exist as a ""FREE WILL EXPRESSION" of the person/God.

But here what God said.

Pr 8:17 I love them that love me;

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him,

If God is going to have a "New Earth" where love exist, then a "CHOICE" had to be placed before "ALL MEN",

Jesus made the choice possible for "All men".

God loved the whole world, but the whole world doesn't return that love, those who do, God saves, those who don't won't be on the "new Earth".

God's not "obligated" to love anyone, neither can God "obligate/predestine" us to love him,

That's not the way love works and the reason we have a "CHOICE".

 

Not surprisingly, you overlooked the whole point of my post; the subject I entered on in the debate is common grace and you want to only engage in proof-texting the whole TULIP. I addressed your verses in one simple line:

“Now we would both agree, I believe, that man can not come to God unless called.”

I then went directly back to the differences in our interpretations of common grace, in which, you have no credible defense against my quote that you originally objected to:

“Grace is no longer grace, if it does not include the saving intent of the Giver”

The only other point I made was that you were the one dodging by trying to start proof-texting the Predestinarian’s view of Total Depravity, which is another debate; and that is where I don’t care to go with you, into a circular scriptural food fight, which is your typical MO. If I did care to go there with you it would be nothing more than a cat and mouse adventure of me trying to get my claws into a rodent that is jumping, twisting, running in circles for its life while looking for hole before I pinned it on the logical conclusion of such a doctrine ending in fatalism. But sorry, this tiger isn’t that hungry for mouse.

 

What Rippon?!? Do you not believe the Bible?

 

Hi MB,

Thanks, I'm glad somebody liked it.

Ben

 

Me4Him......just slow down. You keep posting the same things over and over. But you fail to see the point. If you slow down you may come to a understanding that you will see it is not as simple as you have been posting.

Lets pin point just one subject and see what we have.

The "Yes, An Act" above is to what I said about the atonement. I said it was a love act by God. You agree.

You may disagree with Calvinism, but we are now in Calvinist greatest point. That point...the love of God. Hunt ask....."what love is this?"

Huey Lewis and the News wrote a song back in the 80s I think it was...‘The Power of Love’

Just very simple.....How powerful is Gods love? Was it powerful enough to do deliver on its intent?

My Answer...."the greatest most powerful and pure love in existence".

What is your answer?

 

1st...you dodged what I asked. Why is it that Calvinism haters will not answer?????

Allow me to address what you asked and I will ask again to see if you dodge again.

>>>>I'm not sure why God made man with a will, But we all know that the will is the problem. I wish God had made me as a robot of his kingdom.

Romans 8...

Calvinism does not teach a forced love. Why Calvinism haters can't get that in their heads is beyond me. Yet you need to reread the full chapter of Romans 8 to see how much it belittle Gods love. How powerful is Gods love????

That is soooooooooo wrong my friend. Poor poor poor logic.

If you have a 3 year old and he want to play with a loaded gun...because it is his WILL that wants to play with it, do you show love by letting him have his will...or do you show love by overpower of his will, by your love??

Yes. And who loves 1st? You guys want to take only one side...only part of the verses.

Poor logic...
The will is the sinful part. We need to be CONTROLED by the Spirit

Jesus made the choice possible for "All men".
Not even close to the truth.

I'll not even address the rest....pure rubbish as you build on poor logic


Now I did answer you.

So let me ask again..

Am I right that this is your point?