Why Calvinism is a bad thing.

[Eleazar]

I want to thank all you Gals and Guys for making things so active around here today. You're the best. I've learned that it's not easy to convey complex ideas over the internet.

 

[GeneZ]

Calvinism has a lot of good emphases, the sinfulness of man, the greatness of God's holiness, and the need and power of Christ's atonement.

Where Calvinism makes a wrong turn, is deciding how God should run his world, and that it is offensive for God to put his holiness and glory above the well-being of God's creation.

Ironically, this is what the Calvinists generally accuse others of doing, of being "man-centered," and making doctrines around preferences.

But the truth is, Calvinism sacrifices the love of God and the holiness of God, to collapse all that God allows into God's primary desire, for the sole intent purpose of resolving offense and finding security in removing all free will. The fact that God's holiness is more important than my own personal security, and whether God makes sure I'm not a lost person but guarantees everything I selfishly want in salvation, is something my sin nature will never like or agree to.

It is sinful to find our security in attempting to formulate a doctrine that disallows God to sacrifice our personal security for God's own holiness. We can rest in grace and find our security in God's promise, without needing the false security of God desiring and decreeing all evil things and lost souls.

For those Calvinists who defend with doublespeak, I urge them to just be logically consistent, and admit that God does not decree free will choices.

The entire contact point between God and man is not God's sovereignty.

The first point of contact, before any other attribute of God, is God's Justice.

The Cross was the crux of God's justice.....

 

[civic]

The entire contact point between God and man is not God's sovereignty.

The first point of contact, before any other attribute of God, is God's Justice.

The Cross was the crux of God's justice.....

Thats a matter of perspective.

I see it as the greatest act of love in all of human history.

 

[Administrator]

I haven't figured out how to work the report feature here yet. So I'll just post this.

I'm going to need some cooperation here folks I'm getting a few complaints about us being disrespectful towards each other. That's really the main rule we have here. So please help me out and let's do what Jesus told us to do which was love one another. I know sometimes we can get frustrated when we can't seem to communicate. Remember that movie with Paul Newman Cool Hand Luke? What we have here is a failure to communicate. All I know that we can communicate quite well or we wouldn't be here. Let's just do it in a kind loving civilized manner. Thank you

 

[atpollard]

The doctrine of judicial hardening.

If they were already blind and deaf, what is the need to to further deafen and blind them?

Makes no sense at all.

In Romans 1:26 and Romans 1:28, why did God “give them over to …” when God had already “given them over to …” in Romans 1:24?

Think about it.

 

[GeneZ]

Thats a matter of perspective.

I see it as the greatest act of love in all of human history.

Without Justice first being satisfied?
God would not be free to love us.

Look at Jesus. He was perfectly loved by the Father.
But, when our sins were poured upon Him on the Cross?
The Father had to forsake Him. Love was not the issue.

If we walk in the flesh? God is not free to openly love us, though He still loves us objectively, but with disproval.
He loves us objectively because of His Justice having been satisfied on the Cross.

 

[Arial]

More likely it is comes from the inability to defend your position. Ever noticed how Jesus was calm in the face of questioning? The Word of God us cutting you and it always hurts.

 

[Arial]

Learn to believe what Jesus said. You claim faith and then explain away the words of Christ.

It isn't hyperbole, it is an metaphorical expression. Even so, it clearly teaches that the smallest of faith pleases God. Which is a good thing. You're not setting the world on fire with your faith. In fact, you are denying it to others.

Now you are standing on the line that divides acceptable forum behaviour and unacceptable. That is a personal commit about my character and also slander.

 

[civic]

Without Justice first being satisfied?
God would not be free to love us.

Look at Jesus. He was perfectly loved by the Father.
But, when our sins were poured upon Him on the Cross?
The Father had to forsake Him. Love was not the issue.

If we walk in the flesh? God is not free to openly love us, though He still loves us objectively, but with disproval.
He loves us objectively because of His Justice having been satisfied on the Cross.

Can you point me anywhere in the NT where the cross means justice was served ?

The JUST OVE died for the unjust. That is biblical and found in the N.T.

 

[atpollard]

Can you point me anywhere in the NT where the cross means justice was served ?

I once heard an argument that the death of Jesus was the single most UNJUST act that ever took place. Sinful men murdered the sinless God-man that came to love and save them, because of their irrational hatred. Even the grave could not allow such an act of TOTAL INJUSTICE to stand, so the grave HAD TO release CHRIST.

This is the heart of CHRISTUS VICTOR Atonement.

 

[civic]

I once heard an argument that the death of Jesus was the single most UNJUST act that ever took place. Sinful men murdered the sinless God-man that came to love and save them, because of their irrational hatred. Even the grave could not allow such an act of TOTAL INJUSTICE to stand, so the grave HAD TO release CHRIST.

Yes it was unjust what man did to Him. And I agree with your statement above.

 

[Arial]

Where Calvinism makes a wrong turn, is deciding how God should run his world, and that it is offensive for God to put his holiness and glory above the well-being of God's creation.

The doctrines that come out of what is called Calvinism is the very opposite of deciding how God should run His world. It is based on how God says He runs His world. On who God says He is and what He says He does. This is what I find in it because I find the very same things in the Bible concerning God.

The free will argument on the other hand insists that God is so loving that He would never violate man's free will. At that very juncture it sets the will of man as of more value to God than His own holiness and justice, which it is impossible for Him to violate as it is who He is. His love does not extend to evil for that would contradict His very being. That is why you get the accusations against Calvinism that say "It makes God evil" and such. First of all, the only place the Bible shows man as having free will----a will that is not encumbered by sin (rebellion against God) is in Adam and Eve as created. And it is there that the tables turned, and have remained turned ever since, until one is reborn in Christ. God did not take away our free will, Adam did. Both the Bible and empirical evidence over every day of our long history shows that our will is in bondage---because of what Adam did, not God. It is in bondage to sin. And it cannot set itself free. Sin rules over the unredeemed, and the the only deliverance from that bondage is in Christ.

And that does not say, and neither does Calvinism, that we have no will at all. The will is not actually a thing that stands apart from the rest of us, it is part of us, the thing that moves us one way or the other. And what moves it one way or the other is our desires, whatever pressure is greatest in any given moment. Our will did not remain untouched by the fall but was contaminated by it.

It does not say, and neither does Calvinism, that man does not freely make choices. It does not substitute God's will for man's will, saying that all our evil choices are ordained and directed by God. God governs His creation, meaning none of man's choices will in any way change, delay, or avert God's plans and purposes that existed in full detail and knowledge before creation, and that in the big picture and in some way beyond our vision, everything moves those plans forward. This holds true with the beginning and end of redemption and in the individual and personal lives of all those He gives to the Son.

God's glory and holiness IS above His creation, otherwise there would be no creation. His glory and holiness are manifested in His creation. Romans 1.

 

[GeneZ]

Can you point me anywhere in the NT where the cross means justice was served ?

The JUST OVE died for the unjust. That is biblical and found in the N.T.

I am surprised you are asking that.

Jesus paid for all sins on the Cross. Even the sins for those who will reject Him.

He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only ​

for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2​

​

Even the unbeliever had his sins paid for. That means? Those who go to the Lake of Fire are not going there for their sins.
They are sent there because they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. He is our issue in salvation.

You don't think justice was served on the Cross????

Why not?

 

[civic]

I am surprised you are asking that.

Jesus paid for all sins on the Cross. Even the sins for those who will reject Him.

He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only ​

for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2​

​

Even the unbeliever had his sins paid for. That means? Those who go to the Lake of Fire are not going there for their sins.
They are sent there because they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. He is our issue in salvation.

You don't think justice was served on the Cross????

Why not?

I'm asking where in the N.T. do we read that the Atonement is Gods justice served on Christ. That language is missing unless you can point me to it brother. Until I read it from Jesus or the Apostles teaching I will keep asking that question.

 

[Arial]

@civic

TULIP explained. I will do one letter at a time as each one will require a great deal of expounding on scripture, therefore time and intense focus on my part to do it justice. This is a strain on my need for movement plus I have a lot to do today.

As I go I will change the terms used in order to make an acronym, and in doing so, sacrificed accuracy, leaving much room for the misunderstandings that arise, to more accurate phrasing.

T-Total Depravity

The use of total attached to depravity conjures the idea that we are evil through and through and depraved as we possibly can be. Utter or radical corruption is closer to what is meant.

It simply means that our entire being, including our mind and will was affected by the fall. There is no island in us that was not affected. It changed our nature. It did not destroy our will, we still have it otherwise we would not function at all. It bent it towards sinful desires and became subject to them. As such we became enemies of God, creatures in rebellion to our King and Creator. He our enemy and subject to His judgements, the sentence of death pronounced on us as the sinners. And us as His enemies, bringing evil into the creation through our "hands" our actions and choices.

That this is so we see in Gen 3:16-19. Paul expounds on these very things in Romans 1:18-32, 2:1-12. Here we see the affect man's fall had on all men and on all of creation itself. And the unwillingness of mankind by his very nature, to come to God.

But of course along with God curse placed upon the earth and mankind in Gen we also see the promise. Gen 3:14-15. Redemption announced and the plan put into action. This is the love of God for man and for His creation. The curse is His justice. One does not cancel out the other.

That we are in bondage to sin, which always involves willful rebellion is unequivocally stated in Romans 6:5-6; Eph 2:1-3; Col 1:13; Is 53:4-6.

So the T of tulip is stating that mankind by his nature in Adam due to Adam's fall, is now at enmity with God in that it is bent towards sin, and there will always be times when he will choose sin over God, therefore He will not---because he cannot change his nature---choose God. He doesn't not choose God against his will but because that is his will.

 

[GeneZ]

I'm asking where in the N.T. do we read that the Atonement is Gods justice served on Christ.

You don't know?!


You are failing to understand what atonement means and how the Cross was the fulfillment of that requirement?

You need at least a couple of hours of sound teaching if that is the case.

Not some quick answer in a post.

I am surprised you need to ask that. As if you already did not know.




...........

 

[civic]

You don't know?!


You are failing to understand what atonement means and how the Cross was the fulfillment of that requirement?

You need at least a couple of hours of sound teaching if that is the case.

Not some quick answer in a post.

I am surprised you need to ask that. As if you already did not know.




...........

Justice is a presupposition which is why I'm asking where in the N.T. is that spelled out ?

 

[atpollard]

He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2

Even the unbeliever had his sins paid for. That means? Those who go to the Lake of Fire are not going there for their sins.

I acknowledge that is ONE INTERPRETATION of what John was saying that many hold and many do not. Do you at least acknowledge that there are other ways that those words can be understood that does not have Jesus dying for sins that God will ultimately send people to hell for?

 

[atpollard]

You don't know?!
You are failing to understand what atonement means and how the Cross was the fulfillment of that requirement?
You need at least a couple of hours of sound teaching if that is the case.
Not some quick answer in a post.
I am surprised you need to ask that. As if you already did not know.
...........

Of you could just answer his question by posing the verse.
(Unless he is correct and the verse does not exist, then deflecting rather than answering makes more sense).

 

[Arial]

@civic

TULIP explained. I will do one letter at a time as each one will require a great deal of expounding on scripture, therefore time and intense focus on my part to do it justice. This is a strain on my need for movement plus I have a lot to do today.

As I go I will change the terms used in order to make an acronym, and in doing so, sacrificed accuracy, leaving much room for the misunderstandings that arise, to more accurate phrasing.

T-Total Depravity

The use of total attached to depravity conjures the idea that we are evil through and through and depraved as we possibly can be. Utter or radical corruption is closer to what is meant.

It simply means that our entire being, including our mind and will was affected by the fall. There is no island in us that was not affected. It changed our nature. It did not destroy our will, we still have it otherwise we would not function at all. It bent it towards sinful desires and became subject to them. As such we became enemies of God, creatures in rebellion to our King and Creator. He our enemy and subject to His judgements, the sentence of death pronounced on us as the sinners. And us as His enemies, bringing evil into the creation through our "hands" our actions and choices.

That this is so we see in Gen 3:16-19. Paul expounds on these very things in Romans 1:18-32, 2:1-12. Here we see the affect man's fall had on all men and on all of creation itself. And the unwillingness of mankind by his very nature, to come to God.

But of course along with God curse placed upon the earth and mankind in Gen we also see the promise. Gen 3:14-15. Redemption announced and the plan put into action. This is the love of God for man and for His creation. The curse is His justice. One does not cancel out the other.

That we are in bondage to sin, which always involves willful rebellion is unequivocally stated in Romans 6:5-6; Eph 2:1-3; Col 1:13; Is 53:4-6.

So the T of tulip is stating that mankind by his nature in Adam due to Adam's fall, is now at enmity with God in that it is bent towards sin, and there will always be times when he will choose sin over God, therefore He will not---because he cannot change his nature---choose God. He doesn't not choose God against his will but because that is his will.

@atpollard This was moved to its own thread The Five Points of Calvinism.