Calvinism

No...Christ came to seek and save the LOST. We were ALL lost until God saved some of us. What do you think "saved" means? It means we were once like everyone else, but now we're not. Election pertains to the LOST that God has chosen to adopt.

Aenon, God love ya man, and I enjoy talking with you but you have not grasped this doctrine IMO.

"Predestination" can only refer to the saved!!! God does NOT elect people to hell my friend. That destroys the freedom of choice and choice for God is rooted in LOVE not Law.

Read Romans 8:28-29 for clarity.
"And we know that all things work together for good TO THEM THAT LOVE GOD, TO THEM WHO ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE.
FOR WHOM HE DID FORKNOW HE ALSO DID PREDESTINATE TO BE CONFORMED TO THE IMAGE OF HIS SON, that He might be the firstborn among many brethern".

There it is.......do you see it?????

We are talking about SAVED people. Those who are called according to His purpose are PREDESTINATED to be conformed to the image of His Son. Then Romans goes on to explain how that is done in 8:30..................

"Moreover whom he did PREDESTINATE, them He also CALLED, them he also justified and who he justified them he also gorified".

When God starts out with 100 sheep he will bring 100 sheep home.
 
The Angel said in Matthew 1:21, "Thou shall call his name Jesus for He shall save his people from their sins." That's exactly what He did; He saved HIS PEOPLE from their sins. We do not worship a failure. He didn't "try his best" to save everyone. He didn't "put forth a good effort." He came for the purpose of saving his people and He will accomplish that aim. Take note of the word "many" in Mk. 10:45 and Matt. 20:28. It is not the word "all," but the word "many." Pay attention to the phrase in Acts 20:28, "...to feed the CHURCH OF GOD which he purchased with his own blood."

I agree with you Jack.

IF God elected people to go to hell, then He would be in fact a failure since He did not save all of the lost....correct????

WE DO NOT WORSHIP A FAILURE!!!!

Good point!!!
 
There are only two ways to take it. You either believe Salvation is of the LORD, or Salvation is a choice of man. It can't be both, and it can't be neither. You either had nothing to do with your Salvation and it is by grace alone, or you are the one that chose Jesus (contrary to John 15:16) and therefore you yourself are the reason you're saved.
Aenon it Is mutual. Jesus is knocking at the door, we open or ignore.
Everyone else (with your view) is not smart or humble enough to choose Jesus. You were, so you're in the family. That is conditional salvation.
God's expectation of everyone is the same and WE ARE ALL MORE then capable if WE WILL of meeting it.
If you take a step back and look at the difference between the two views, you will see that the Arminian view is incredibly man-centered. The view is saying salvation came because I believe, election because God saw I would choose, atonement because I accepted, or perseverance if I continue. Salvation is of the Lord, not of will of man (John 1:13).
Sure, the I in every statement is pro-active…. just as a groom is with his bride. Do you want a bride to make herself your wife without you doing anything? Sure she can plan and organise everything, but ultimately unless you are living in a cultish religion from the east, you have the option to say yes or no...and saying yes is not difficult when you do indeed love her.
 
JACK: If we are "dead" how can we choose or not choose Christ?
If he died for all mankind why isn't all mankind saved? Did He even die for the sin of rejecting Him?
KINGJ: Dead, as in dead in sin and doomed for hell. Well that's easy, God comes to us. All of God's creation speaks of Him…in this doomed world of sin where we are dead. Life / God is there for everyone to see and take (Romans 1:20).
JACK: So, how can a person "dead in trespasses and sin" "choose" Christ?
I don't see the point in replying as I would just be repeating myself :oops:.

Care to take a stab at post # 17?
 
I don't see the point in replying as I would just be repeating myself :oops:.

Care to take a stab at post # 17?


POST #17

There is a window of grace that God gives children. The window is the moment of conception to the moment of knowledge between good and evil. God does not hold a human being accountable for doing wrong and not being capable of understanding and being taught why. This is why I believe all children and the mentally handicap are elect. They are incapable of discerning good from evil

Aenon, this section was copied from the link in your OP thread 'do babies go to heaven'.

That statement makes perfect sense. But it does not tie up for me with Calvinism. Quote wikipedia '' God has chosen from eternity to extend mercy to those He has chosen and to withhold mercy from those not chosen.''.

Any sane person reading the two WILL say that you believe some babies will go to hell and others not.
Unless we assume ''He has chosen to show mercy on babies, remaining babies...''….we will live for eternity with babies? The mentally challenged will forever be mentally challenged? ....if they grew up there is a chance they will not be amongst the justified for mercy?… we are then justified in killing our babies?

JACK: This wasn't my OP, but nonetheless, as Calvin wrote in his Institutes, he believed all infants must be of the elect. I already stated my view in an earlier post concerning I Kings 14:13. One of the kings was so wicked that a curse was placed upon his family that none of them would be buried. But this infant dies and "something good was found in him" and is allowed to be buried. Hence, I take it that Calvin was probably right in his assessment. Are you actually trying to make the argument that because all who die as infants will be saved, abortion is justified because that guarantees their salvation? Are you serious?​
 
I don't see the point in replying as I would just be repeating myself :oops:.

Care to take a stab at post # 17?
JACK: So, how can a person "dead in trespasses and sin" "choose" Christ?

Jack asks a question that facinates me for the simple reason that it should not be asked.

How does any person get saved???? God the Holy Spirit convicts us of sin and points us to Christ. "Spiritually" we are dead in sin, NOT physically.
 
Spiritually we are deaf to the gospel (Jn. 8:43, 47) blind to the gospel (2 Cor. 4:3-4) and in Eph. 2:1 the word for dead is NEKROS meaning dead in the sense of being incapable of response. So, how can such a person in that spiritual state "accept" Christ? Lazarus was commanded by Christ to come forth. So, what must have happened for this corpse to hear and follow that command? He must have been made alive first. We have a marvelous picture of that in Ezekiel 37 as the prophet is preaching to the valley of dead, dry bones. It is God who gives the increase.
 
JACK: This wasn't my OP, but nonetheless, as Calvin wrote in his Institutes, he believed all infants must be of the elect. I already stated my view in an earlier post concerning I Kings 14:13. One of the kings was so wicked that a curse was placed upon his family that none of them would be buried. But this infant dies and "something good was found in him" and is allowed to be buried. Hence, I take it that Calvin was probably right in his assessment. Are you actually trying to make the argument that because all who die as infants will be saved, abortion is justified because that guarantees their salvation? Are you serious?​

:) I know it wasnt your OP, but thanks for answering.

No chance of getting a straight forward / simple answer? Your reply is vague, you appear to be dodging or mis-reading my post.

If elected are sealed in heaven and babies are as per you and Aenon, elected. Then we are more then justified in killing our babies. If I knew my baby was gauranteed eternity in heaven, he would die tomorrow! I do not care if I go to hell for murder. God will see the noble, unselfish heart and 'probably' send me to heaven too.
 
:) I know it wasnt your OP, but thanks for answering.

No chance of getting a straight forward / simple answer? Your reply is vague, you appear to be dodging or mis-reading my post.

If elected are sealed in heaven and babies are as per you and Aenon, elected. Then we are more then justified in killing our babies. If I knew my baby was gauranteed eternity in heaven, he would die tomorrow! I do not care if I go to hell for murder. God will see the noble, unselfish heart and 'probably' send me to heaven too.

I don't know how much more straight forward anyone could have made it. There is never a time when a Christian is ever "justified" in murder. The twisted reasoning that you present (which I realize may not be your personal view) is probably why the Scripture itself is so vague on the issue. There is no definitive passage that answers the question you raised.
 
I don't know how much more straight forward anyone could have made it. There is never a time when a Christian is ever "justified" in murder. The twisted reasoning that you present (which I realize may not be your personal view) is probably why the Scripture itself is so vague on the issue. There is no definitive passage that answers the question you raised.
The bible is pretty clear, we just need to use some common sense / lateral thinking as I explained in the specific thread.

The issue is, that with a Calvinist belief system, there is NO way of convincing someone to NOT kill their babies. As you have to believe babies are elected…………..............................................
 
No, the issue is: what does the text say? Do you know of anyone, in the name of Calvinism, who runs around murdering children? The very same thing can be said for Arminians. First, get a person saved and then shoot them before they can change their mind.
 
Once you have made the decision to ''truly'' accept Jesus as Lord, you don't / can't just change your mind.
Most here believe once saved always saved or once saved, extremely difficult to lose salvation as God does everything in His power to keep us.

But, Calvinism, literally has no answer. Except to leave one believing all elected are chosen for eternity in heaven. Babies are elected...therefore killing babies guarantees them eternity in heaven.

What would you say to Andrea Yates?
 
So, once you become a Christian you forfiet your "free will" to ever disbelieve in Christ? To believe that we are chosen before the world began has nothing to do with Calvinism, it's a Bible fact in Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4; and 2 Thess. 2:13. No one disputes that, but people differ concerning who are elected. I mentioned and cited the Scripture in First Kings that I believe tends to teach that infants dying in infancy are saved, but, as I said, there is very little mentioned on the subject in Scripture. I don't know what you're implying by accusing me of "dodging." Dodging what? When I was in seminary, we had one professor who quite frankly said the fate of infants who die in infancy, as far as he was concerned, was "unknown." While I don't agree with him, I can understand how he arrived at that conclusion. I don't know who Andrea Yates is.
 
So, once you become a Christian you forfiet your "free will" to ever disbelieve in Christ? To believe that we are chosen before the world began has nothing to do with Calvinism, it's a Bible fact in Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4; and 2 Thess. 2:13. No one disputes that, but people differ concerning who are elected. I mentioned and cited the Scripture in First Kings that I believe tends to teach that infants dying in infancy are saved, but, as I said, there is very little mentioned on the subject in Scripture. I don't know what you're implying by accusing me of "dodging." Dodging what? When I was in seminary, we had one professor who quite frankly said the fate of infants who die in infancy, as far as he was concerned, was "unknown." While I don't agree with him, I can understand how he arrived at that conclusion. I don't know who Andrea Yates is.

It is a fact that there is very little said in the Scriptures on this topic.

Maybe that is because it is such a common sense thing. God did give us a brain and logic and common sense along with the Scriptures.
 
Spiritually we are deaf to the gospel (Jn. 8:43, 47) blind to the gospel (2 Cor. 4:3-4) and in Eph. 2:1 the word for dead is NEKROS meaning dead in the sense of being incapable of response. So, how can such a person in that spiritual state "accept" Christ? Lazarus was commanded by Christ to come forth. So, what must have happened for this corpse to hear and follow that command? He must have been made alive first. We have a marvelous picture of that in Ezekiel 37 as the prophet is preaching to the valley of dead, dry bones. It is God who gives the increase.

I understand what you are saying, BUT wasn't Lazarus already a believer?
 
Not just that but the assumption that Jesus forces His will on Lazarus.........when we should know the gentle / polite nature of Jesus and the Holy Spirit....

What happened behind the scenes was the Holy Spirit / God asked Lazarus if he would like to come to earth, he said yes and bam, he is on earth. He didnt need to question God much as in his spiritual state he probably has 100% trust and will do as God asks immediately. I just can't help feeling irritated by the insinuation that God would be forceful and grab Lazarus against his will.
 
KINGJ: I just can't help feeling irritated by the insinuation that God would be forceful and grab Lazarus against his will.

JACK: There you go again thinking that some people believe that God forces people to do something against their will and nothing could be more ridiculous. You really have a totally wrong idea about what is common known as Calvinism, and because of that, you have this idea that it is something unbiblical and evil. I understand that because I use to have the exact same thinking. Joshua 24:12 when God sent the hornets into Canaan and evacuated the Canaanites tribes. He didn't make them go against their will; He just made them willing to go. Unsaved man doesn't want God and is unwilling to receive Him. In the book of Revelation, man is so far dipped in sin that even when he sees God in the heavens he asks the mountains to fall upon him to hide him from the face of the Lord. Man is dead in traspasses and sins. Jesus said, "No one can come to me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him..." (John 6:44). The word "can" in this verse is a Greek word that means "does not have the ability." It is the same word used in John 3:3, "Unless a man is born again he CAN NOT see the kingdom..." and also in 10:29, "NO man IS ABLE to pluck them out of my hand."
 
Does Unconditional Election makes God a hypocrite and simply gives a good argument to non beleivers that God is really evil and wicked for picking and choosing who gets His mercy and who gets his wrath?

There is no such thing as unconditional election in God's Word. Becoming a member of the so-called elect is based on our choosing to positively respond to God's drawing us to Jesus.
I challenge anyone to provide scripture that supports Unconditional Election. Please don't quote scripture that refers to God's chosen people, the Israelites. That is a separate and totally different issue.
Every one should remember that Jean Cauvin (John Calvin) was trained as a humanist lawyer. His doctrinal thesis was based more on his reactions to the RCC, than it was to his actual understanding of the scriptures. Today's Calvinists are taught his doctrine before they are even taught HOW to read and practice proper hermeneutical exegesis.
 
The term "free will" never appears in Scripture.

Wrong!

Philemon 1:14 (MOUNCE)
but I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that your helpfulness might not be by compulsion but by your own free will.

This is always a problem with certain sides of an issue. In this case the words DO appear, but they don't have to, to convey the concept. Free will is clearly expressed in many scriptures.
Maybe you can find just ONE scripture, as I did above, that clearly indicates mankind has NO free will?
 
There is no such thing as unconditional election in God's Word. Becoming a member of the so-called elect is based on our choosing to positively respond to God's drawing us to Jesus.
I challenge anyone to provide scripture that supports Unconditional Election. Please don't quote scripture that refers to God's chosen people, the Israelites. That is a separate and totally different issue.
Every one should remember that Jean Cauvin (John Calvin) was trained as a humanist lawyer. His doctrinal thesis was based more on his reactions to the RCC, than it was to his actual understanding of the scriptures. Today's Calvinists are taught his doctrine before they are even taught HOW to read and practice proper hermeneutical exegesis.

Then explain Acts 13:48 and/or 2 Thess. 2:13.
 
Top