I realize this author is not supportive of Calvinism, but would Calvinists here agree with him that this is a correct summary of our contention?
Evangelical leaders, such as John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, Tim Keller and many other influential teachers are all promoting John Calvin’s so-called “doctrines of grace.” In short, these doctrines teach that God has long ago decided who will and will not be saved. Accordingly, the chosen ones, a preselect number of people referred to as “the elect,” will most certainly be saved, while the rest are left without any hope. Of course, there is much more explanation and various approaches of interpretation given by Calvinistic teachers that may serve to somewhat soften the blow of this harsh claim. Nonetheless, the idea that God has predetermined to save a particular number of people to the neglect of all others is the primary point of dispute regarding this dogma.
Question for Calvinists
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by Skandelon, Aug 1, 2014.
Page 1 of 6
-
-
tyndale1946 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I personally believe in Election as do some other brethren on here but I believe your interpretation of how you understand it is in error. There is also mentioned in Matthew of a very elect who were or are they?
-
"Soften the blow of this harsh doctrine." Really? For God to demonstrate His grace on those of His choosing is a harsh doctrine?! The author is in effect saying :"How dare God do this! I know better! I say it is completely unjust. I admit I'm a sinner and that God is in charge, but this election stuff is too much for me to swallow. I am more merciful than the Lord. I wish He could be as fair as I am --after all, everybody deserves a chance." -
-
pinoybaptist Active MemberSite Supporter
-
Now this would sound like an evil plan, except for the fact that God did not leave all of mankind to this death and destruction without an option to escape the condition he finds himself in. Without the freewill to choose, it would certainly be observed as neglect on God's part to cherry pick a few to make worshipping robots out of and leave the rest to destruction. He could have done that from the get go without all of this drama. But praise Jesus, God has made the way for whosoever will to come to Him and be saved. Praise Him!!!! :godisgood: -
Webster: Neglect: 1. to give little attention or respect, to disregard. Obviously this does not fit Calvinistic theology as they don’t claim that God gives little attention or respect to the lost…nor does God disregard the lost (God is attentive to the lost and exercises justice). 2. To leave undone or unattended, especially through carelessness. Again, this is far from understanding the Calvinistic view of election as they find a divine purpose for those who don’t believe.
Neglect hints at obligation. Even if you believe that God was morally or otherwise obligated to save all men, or to offer salvation to all men, you cannot apply this to Calvinism because it quite simply does not apply.
In other words, it is a fair statement for you to say you believe Calvinism ultimately presents God as neglecting some people in election because all men deserve the offer of salvation...or because God is obligated to offer salvation to all…but in the context of the OP - asking if Calvinists would agree - you would be misunderstanding Calvinism, failing to engage their doctrine by imposing a twist to their theology that does not exist, and speaking past the issue. When examining opposing theologies we need to be honest in our critique (I take it from other statements in your post, however, that honesty in discourse on this topic is not your intent). -
-
You see, God could not demonstrate his justice if he did not have someone to punish, and this is why God passes by most of mankind. God needs sinners to punish to demonstrate how great he is according to Calvinism.
It has nothing to do with sin, because God made his choice before you were ever born and had done good or evil (Rom 9:11). Sin is just the justification to punish you to glorify God. And God ordained that man would fall so that all men would have a sin nature to bring this plan to pass.
There is absolutely no neglect whatsoever, it is a very carefully devised plan. -
-
-
My understanding of Calvinism may also be wrong. Here is what I have come to understand regarding their doctrine: All men sin, all men choose to disobey God, and all men stand in rightful condemnation. God chooses a people out of fallen men. If this is correct, then condemnation is of men’s own choosing.
Likewise…my answer to the OP is that the statement is most likely problematic to the Calvinist as it is, IMHO and my interpretation of “neglect,” foreign to their doctrine.
-
In Calvinism, before any person was ever born, and before they had done any good or evil, God had ordained that certain persons would be passed by and condemned for their sin. Therefore, sin must also be ordained to give righteous justification for this damnation that was ordained before these persons were born or ever committed sin.
Simple logic. -
-
-
-
Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
Plain as day. -
Anyway…sorry Skandelon for straying off topic.
-
There is no neglect, it is all deliberate.
Page 1 of 6