What's Wrong with Calvinism?

[TedT]

key for the non separation is

But he said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them.

Yes, basically "NO!" means postpone the judgement so you don't uproot the sinful seed with them...we will wait until they are holy to condemn the weeds. Our sins keep this suffering world going around!

 

[TedT]

Why would you ask "then why did HE just not create those HE knew would end in thell???"

HE wants an empty hell.

You claimed HE knew in advance who would accept salvation so only gave the gift to those HE knew would accept Christ.

So, why did HE create those HE knew in advance would end in hell against HIS own desires?

 

[TomL]

Again, the "us" are what is chosen. Why? To be holy and blameless.

Scripture says it is Christ who causes you to be born again. 1 Peter 3:1. Scripture refutes your errant man made religion.

1 Peter 3:1?

1 Peter 3:1 (LEB) — 1 In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some are disobedient to the word, they may be won over without a word by the conduct of their wives,

really?

Once again it is those who are in Christ who are chosen to be holy and blameless

And unbelievers cannot be made alive so as to believe

John 3:36 (KJV 1900) — 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

 

[TomL]

Yes, basically "NO!" means postpone the judgement so you don't uproot the sinful seed with them...we will wait until they are holy to condemn the weeds. Our sins keep this suffering world going around!

Just the opposite

For when you try to remove the tares you may wind up also removing the wheat

 

[FreeInChrist]

But is not our salvation a gift of GOD by faith? Are we not all equal in evil in HIS sight? When HE looks ahead to our redemption does HE not already know who will be redeemed because HE knows to whom HE will give the gift of faith? So why does HE restrict HIS gift to only some when without the work of the Holy Spirit, no one would accept HIS gift at all??

AND: if HIS foreknowledge included who would chose to accept HIS offer of salvation then why did HE just not create those HE knew would end in thell??? HE wants no one to perish, 2 Peter 3:0 and prefers that everyone turn from his ways and live, Ez 18:23 showing that HE wants an empty hell so why create those HE know will end there???

Salvation is a gift indeed, by faith. But I view God's foreknowledge as such that He knows who will come to faith. Who will believe the truth they hear and he bestows His gift on them because he knows that their faith is solid.

I only view predestination in the light od some people He actually predestined... prophets, etc.... for they had a work that had to be done because He needed people on earth getting the word out and the job done. Is that too simplified? Good.

 

[TomL]

HE wants an empty hell.

You claimed HE knew in advance who would accept salvation so only gave the gift to those HE knew would accept Christ.

So, why did HE create those HE knew in advance would end in hell against HIS own desires?

Actually I noted two possibilities

One was foreknowledge
The other collectivism

So your claim is not correct.

 

[TomL]

Yes, basically "NO!" means postpone the judgement so you don't uproot the sinful seed with them...we will wait until they are holy to condemn the weeds. Our sins keep this suffering world going around!

No it means dont pull up the sinful seed (the tares) now, for you might pull out some wheat while removing the tares.

 

[TedT]

Salvation is indeed a gift. Faith on the otherhand is not an irresistible gift.

And, so the gift of salvation is iffy based upon the success or failure of the faith that provides it???

But those with faith are never condemned but those who never had faith are condemned already no?

 

[TomL]

...which implies that not everyone being saved is just plain wrong! The GOD who is lovingly righteous and just has no reason to create a system for the creation of people to be HIS bride under these awful conditions. <head shake, facepalm>

The pre creation decision was to make holy and blameless those who would be in Christ

 

[TedT]

Just the opposite

For when you try to remove the tares you may wind up also removing the wheat

Opposite? Opposite of what??
It sounds like a replay of what I wrote!

 

[TedT]

Salvation is a gift indeed, by faith. But I view God's foreknowledge as such that He knows who will come to faith. Who will believe the truth they hear and he bestows His gift on them because he knows that their faith is solid.

If this is true, why create those HE knows will not accept HIS gift of faith in light of the verses which suggest HE wants hell to be empty and none to perish.

 

[TomL]

And, so the gift of salvation is iffy based upon the success or failure of the faith that provides it???

But those with faith are never condemned but those who never had faith are condemned already no?

The point was God does not irresistibly cause faith in man.

It was not concerned with the preservation or perseverance of the saints.

 

[TomL]

Opposite? Opposite of what??
It sounds like a replay of what I wrote!

Read what you wrote

Yes, basically "NO!" means postpone the judgement so you don't uproot the sinful seed with them...we will wait until they are holy to condemn the weeds. Our sins keep this suffering world going around!

The removal concerns the tares now. It is not done now so the wheat may not be pulled out with the tares

 

[TedT]

HE wants an empty hell.

You claimed HE knew in advance who would accept salvation so only gave the gift to those HE knew would accept Christ.

So, why did HE create those HE knew in advance would end in hell against HIS own desires?

Actually I noted two possibilities

One was foreknowledge
The other collectivism

So your claim is not correct.

I find no correlation between what I wrote and this reply...

 

[TomL]

Read what you wrote



The removal concerns the tares now. It is not done now so the wheat may not be pulled out with the tares

Can you not see the difference?

 

[TomL]

I find no correlation between what I wrote and this reply...

Then read what you stated

"You claimed HE knew in advance who would accept salvation so only gave the gift to those HE knew would accept Christ."

I noted the possibility of both foreknowledge and collectivism, which does not require a foreknowledge of who each person is.

 

[Aeliana]

What's Wrong with Calvinism?​

Three things that I can think of:

1. It is undefined, so the term is used to mean different things to different people at different times. “Calvinism” can be used to mean “T.U.L.I.P” or “Doctrines of Grace” to some. It means “Predestination” and “Hard Determinism” to others. It means “Calvin’s Institutes” to a few and the “Westminster Confession of Faith” (WCF) to some. With so vast a range of often contradictory meanings, there really is no “Calvinism” any more than there is one “Christianity” that all believes the same thing.
2. It is misnamed. With the exception of those that equate “Calvinism” with “The Institutes” (written by John Calvin), none of the other common definitions trace back to John Calvin as their source. John Calvin was dead by the time the Synod of Dort created the response to the 5 points of Jacob Arminius that would lead to “T.U.L.I.P.” in the 1930’s.
3. People have such a visceral hatred for the ideas associated with Calvinism (the whole broad range of definitions) that they refuse to see any of the scripture from which most of the ideas were drawn or acknowledge even the possibility that scripture might say anything even remotely resembling what any “Calvinist” claims. The consequence is that there are few honest discussions and a lot of “Yes, but …” tit for tat arguments that usually jump from one hated point/verse to another without ever really digging into any subject beyond the “drive-by scripture pong” level of discussion.

As I see it, THAT is what is wrong with “Calvinism”.

Tip of the iceberg.

They think God's grace needs more grace to work. God’s gracious words need not a magical working or be infused with some supernatural inner grace to have their intended effect. They simply must be clear and understandable.

The supernaturally inspired words of the gospel are sufficient to accomplish their biblically stated purpose without an additional supernatural working. Mankind has been created by God with the basic capacity to hear, understand and respond to clearly revealed truth. Those who do respond negatively to the clearly revealed truth of the gospel are not somehow morally restricted from doing otherwise or dead.

The natural man who is alive and deems the things of the Spirit foolish do so by their own free moral choice, not by an innate necessity which is beyond their control. Total depravity is wrong by teaching every human being is corrupted by sin in every aspect of their nature, making them unable to choose God or seek salvation without His direct intervention.

Does it make much sense to teach that mankind is born in a kind of fallen condition that makes them unable to even respond willingly to God’s own powerful and gracious appeals to be reconciled from that fallen condition?

 

[Aeliana]

Tip of the iceberg.

They think God's grace needs more grace to work. God’s gracious words need not a magical working or be infused with some supernatural inner grace to have their intended effect. They simply must be clear and understandable.

The supernaturally inspired words of the gospel are sufficient to accomplish their biblically stated purpose without an additional supernatural working. Mankind has been created by God with the basic capacity to hear, understand and respond to clearly revealed truth. Those who do respond negatively to the clearly revealed truth of the gospel are not somehow morally restricted from doing otherwise or dead.

The natural man who is alive and deems the things of the Spirit foolish do so by their own free moral choice, not by an innate necessity which is beyond their control. Total depravity is wrong by teaching every human being is corrupted by sin in every aspect of their nature, making them unable to choose God or seek salvation without His direct intervention.

Does it make much sense to teach that mankind is born in a kind of fallen condition that makes them unable to even respond willingly to God’s own powerful and gracious appeals to be reconciled from that fallen condition?

The Gospel is the good news that God has made a way of salvation through the life, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ for any person. This is in keeping with God’s desire for every person to be saved. Not all will come to the cross, but they do have the opportunity.

I do not believe that only a select few are capable of responding to the Gospel while the rest are predestined to an eternity in hell.