Handling Scripture Like John Calvin

Credit allendale for my post above!

It is not really a religion either. Not Christ but fate is at the Calvinism’s core; fatalism is the rudest form of the religious consciousness, predating even paganism.

It actually believes that God would create human beings who would suffer for eternity as their predestined fate.

Romans 9:21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known gthe riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he hhas prepared beforehand for glory

Proverbs 17:4 The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.

1 Peter 2:8 “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

To prove Calvinism from Romans 9:21 the potter in it must be shown making a pot, then breaking it, then making another, breaking it...

Yes, God makes sinners also; He does not make them sin.

[God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4)

“on the contrary, you did the dumping and also irrational, emotional and plain wrong statement leading.”

lol, I’ll be very surprised if you even know why you made this post.

“Yes, God makes sinners also; He does not make them sin.

[God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4)”

Read the verse in context; there are also logical problems with the belief that God “wills” their salvation, but cannot accomplish what He wills. I’ll let Saint Augustine instruct you, from his commentary on the same verse:

“Who will have all men to be saved;” not that there is no man whose salvation He does not will (for how, then, explain the fact that He was unwilling to work miracles in the presence of some who, He said, would have repented if He had worked them?), but that we are to understand by “all men,” the human race in all its varieties of rank and circumstances,—kings, subjects; noble, plebeian, high, low, learned, and unlearned; the sound in body, the feeble, the clever, the dull, the foolish, the rich, the poor, and those of middling circumstances; males, females, infants, boys, youths; young, middle-aged, and old men; of every tongue, of every fashion, of all arts, of all professions, with all the innumerable differences of will and conscience, and whatever else there is that makes a distinction among men. For which of all these classes is there out of which God does not will that men should be saved in all nations through His only-begotten Son, our Lord, and therefore does save them; for the Omnipotent cannot will in vain, whatsoever He may will? Now the apostle had enjoined that prayers should be made for all men, and had especially added, “For kings, and for all that are in authority,” who might be supposed, in the pride and pomp of worldly station, to shrink from the humility of the Christian faith. Then saying, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour,” that is, that prayers should be made for such as these, he immediately adds, as if to remove any ground of despair, “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” [I Tim. 2:1-4]. God, then, in His great condescension has judged it good to grant to the prayers of the humble the salvation of the exalted; and assuredly we have many examples of this. Our Lord, too, makes use of the same mode of speech in the Gospel, when He says to the Pharisees: “Ye tithe mint, and rue, and every herb” [Luke 11:42]. For the Pharisees did not tithe what belonged to others, nor all the herbs of all the inhabitants of other lands. As, then, in this place we must understand by “every herb,” every kind of herbs, so in the former passage we may understand by “all men,” every sort of men. And we may interpret it in any other way we please, so long as we are not compelled to believe that the omnipotent God has willed anything to be done which was not done: for setting aside all ambiguities, if “He hath done all that He pleased in heaven and in earth” [Ps. 115:3]. as the psalmist sings of Him, He certainly did not will to do anything that He hath not done.” (Augustine, Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Ch. 103. Interpretation of the Expression in I Tim. 2:4: “Who Will Have All Men to Be Saved”.)

“To prove Calvinism from Romans 9:21 the potter in it must be shown making a pot...

“Shall the thing FORMED say to HIM that FORMED it, Why hast thou made me thus?” (Rom 9:20

“...then breaking it,”

“Hath not the POTTER power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and ANOTHER UNTO DISHONOUR?” (Rom 9:21)

Done and done.

It is true that at times “all men” is some kind of a shorthand for “great many” or “nearly all”. But the context of 1 Timothy 2:4 does not allow for such lax interpretation: the word “all” is repeated several times, the people Timothy might be disinclined to pray, such as the kings (none, at the time, Christian) are specially mentioned, Christ is explained to be one mediator whereas if several groups existed, those who God wills to be saved and those who He doesn’t, then an explanation would be needed who mediates for the reprobates, and why in fact the righteous need any mediation.

So no, the plain word of the Bible contradicts Calvin as on any other Calvinist distinctive.

To make a pot “into dishonor” is not the same as breaking it. Sin is what breaks the proverbial pot. “Into dishonor” simply means what we all know, that not all men have a lofty disposition and God makes them all, prince and pauper, saint and scoundrel. Again it is a stretch beyond what the parable bears to invent calvinism out of it.

I forgot to mention the other silly prooftext, 1 Peter 2:8. That is simply not there textually: observe the crafty use of quotation marks suggesting a meaning not in the plain text.

“So no, the plain word of the Bible contradicts Calvin as on any other Calvinist distinctive.”

Leave it to the Catholic to argue by assertion and think he’s accomplished anything. Why should we regard your posts, when you stand against Augustine? What makes the interpretation “lax”? You don’t even explain yourself, but still fill the thread with useless posts, even after you, by your silence, concede Romans 9 to us.

I’ll also add that if you hold to this doctrine, you not only contradict the scriptures that are clear that only some receive to believe, and not all, but you also deny God’s omnipotence, as Augustine detailed.

“I forgot to mention the other silly prooftext, 1 Peter 2:8. That is simply not there textually: observe the crafty use of quotation marks suggesting a meaning not in the plain text.”

I’m not seeing any quotation marks.

1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.

“are specially mentioned, Christ is explained to be one mediator whereas if several groups existed, those who God wills to be saved and those who He doesn’t, then an explanation would be needed who mediates for the reprobates, and why in fact the righteous need any mediation.”

I forgot to reply to this since I didn’t think it was a serious argument, but I noticed it again and thought I better say something.

My response is: What ARE you even talking about? Who the heck is mediating their damnation? Why is a mediator required to mediate their damnation?

AGAIN, I responded too soon, and didn’t notice this section, since I dismissed it as silly at first, and so completely forgot about it after I responded to your first section. But I have to remember I ought to reply to it, even when it is silly:

“To make a pot “into dishonor” is not the same as breaking it. Sin is what breaks the proverbial pot. “Into dishonor” simply means what we all know, that not all men have a lofty disposition and God makes them all, prince and pauper, saint and scoundrel.”

None of this is founded on anything in those verses. You do not even use the verse at all to come to any of these conclusions. In fact, read the verse that even leads into it:

Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

How is it that Paul replies to this objection with: “Nay, but, O Man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say unto Him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus?” And immediately begins his discourse on the vessels of wrath doomed to destruction, if, in fact, the question from Paul’s hypothetical opponent is based on a false premise? Why didn’t Paul say, “Nay, but, O man, God didn’t predestinate anyone to salvation or anyone to destruction!”

What your “interpretation” tells me is that you probably didn’t even bother to read the chapter in question, but are literally going off of what I am showing you in these posts.

You need to really actually read the verses, and not just make these random assertions that are self-evidently false. Same thing in reply to your silly comment about them not being “destroyed,” when, obviously, if they are created for dishonor, and a little later, are called vessels of wrath, obviously God intends to destroy them. If that is not enough proof, then neither is there any proof that the “vessels of mercy” actually are intended for mercy. And therefore are salvation is entirely in question.

Yawn. Tomorrow.

“Yawn. Tomorrow.”

Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow, creeps forth in this petty Catholic pace, and all our yesterdays have lighted fools to dusty death!

well, prepared to be surprised, it is because your post was irrational, emotional and plain wrong.

“well, prepared to be surprised, it is because your post was irrational, emotional and plain wrong.”

The sad part is, you probably believe that, though you couldn’t possibly know why! Go kiss a Koran like Pope John Paul, and leave the adult topics to he adults.

To your several. If I miss an important question, please ask again.

Romans 9:21 In context:

not they that are the children of the flesh, are the children of God; but they, that are the children of the promise, are accounted for the seed. [9] For this is the word of promise: According to this time will I come; and Sara shall have a son. [10] And not only she. But when Rebecca also had conceived at once, of Isaac our father.
[11] For when the children were not yet born, nor had done any good or evil (that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand,) [12] Not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said to her: The elder shall serve the younger. [13] As it is written: Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. [14] What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? God forbid. [15] For he saith to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy.
[16] So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. [17] For the scripture saith to Pharao: To this purpose have I raised thee, that I may shew my power in thee, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. [18] Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will; and whom he will, he hardeneth. [19] Thou wilt say therefore to me: Why doth he then find fault? for who resisteth his will? [20] O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus?
[21] Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? [22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction, [23] That he might shew the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory? [24] Even us, whom also he hath called, nor only of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles

Read: the sense of the passage is to explain that the people of Gentile race may be among the Elect and obtain salvation. The purpose of the passage is not to "prove" the calvinist error of God willingly making us reprobate. The analogy of the Potter is to show that God has power over the physical heritage of the flesh in the case of each individual Christian. The cases of divine "hatred" (with St. Paul, I am borrowing an Old Testament term),-- the preference of Jacob over Esau and the hardening of the heart of the Pharao are cases of divine love toward the elect, when certain actors are caused to lead the elect toward their predestined path of good works. So then God is shaping us like a potter toward glory of some (vessels of glory) and toward some utilitarian function (vessels of dishonor), but He never makes a pot in order to break it: God is not causing our sin.

1 Timothy 2

[1] I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: [2] For kings, and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity. [3] For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, [4] Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. [5] For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: [6] Who gave himself a redemption for all, a testimony in due times.

I don't know what to add to my earlier post.

It is true that at times “all men” is some kind of a shorthand for “great many” or “nearly all”. But the context of 1 Timothy 2:4 does not allow for such lax interpretation: the word “all” is repeated several times, the people Timothy might be disinclined to pray, such as the kings (none, at the time, Christian) are specially mentioned, Christ is explained to be one mediator whereas if several groups existed, those who God wills to be saved and those who He doesn’t, then an explanation would be needed who mediates for the reprobates, and why in fact the righteous need any mediation.

Let me address your comments. St. Augustine is an authority of the Church, like any father of the Church, but only when he, -- or any other father, -- remain within consensus patrum. St. Augustine's views on predestination shifted over time and in any case are not to be taken as if it were view of the entire Church. In the case on hand, his reading is plainly in contradiction with the text; it is tendentious interpretative reading. It is "lax" in the sense that it tendentiously loosens the direct and absolute meaning of "all" into some vague "not really all". I am capable of understanding the text and pointing out to you that, even though I am a simple lay Catholic without a theology degree.

Why is a mediator required to mediate their damnation?

If we understand the passage by its plain text, "God wills all to be saved" then we have no difficulty understanding that "there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus". But if the passage secretly meant "God wills some to be saved and others to be condemned" then an explanation is needed: is Christ mediating for the saved only? Is anyone but Christ mediating for the reprobates? Should Timothy in his church intercede for all or just for the elect? How is Timothy to know who the elect are?

If "all" is not "all" then the passage becomes very unclear and uncomplete, yet is commands something: to make intercession. How could St. Paul command of Timothy to make intercession and then (if "all" is no longer "all") not explain for whom?

1 Peter 2:8

[7] To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: [8]And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set.

The ending word is ετεθησαν, occuring also in Acts 7:16, where is plainly translated as "laid" [in the sepulchre]. The fanciful "appointed" of King James translation is tendentious, and the original has no hint of anything being predestined to stumble. Christ is the cornerstone of all: some build a church on that stone, others stumble over it, but one way or another He is the foundation for all of us, for as the Creed explains "though Him all things were made". That is the beautiful meaning of Peter's metaphor, that the ilk of Calvin seek to pervert into a proof texts for themselves. This is the original Gamecock's #43:

1 Peter 2:8 “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

Notice that the quotation marks extend to the first part of the verse, and then they are replaced by a flight of fancy, conjuring up an image of Jesus the Cornerstone inserting Himself into the path of the unsuspecting reprobate causing him to fall.

God is love. God will all to be saved. God does not cause sin. In his omnipotent power God gave us free will, which God loves to respect. Calvin is a damnable deceiver of Christians. Luther was bad enough, but it is from Calvin that the common today among the Protestants school of biblical exegesis that begins and ends with denial of plain scripture originates. Anyone who reads the Holy Scripture with love and attention will run away from Calvinist falsehoods and become Catholic, and rejoice in the fullness of Christian faith.

Nor a catechism. Sheesh!

Were you there, salvation, to see Peter made head of your church?

So how do you know? Cause your church teaches that? Hmmm...or because it misinterprets that verse of Scripture.

Wonder why I bother though. No teachable or humble spirits here at all.

Would be lovely if just once somebody Catholic wanted to know the truth and not just parrot back what their church thinks and has ingrained in them.

Please, Lord, send just one with a gracious, kind, and humble spirit that sincerely desires to know Your truth. Amen

Oh my, I was so thinking the same!!

So NOW he wants the bible!

That is too funny for words.

Bloody Greek text always makes my posts funky! Here it is again, fixed. I’ll ask the Mod to erase the goofy squished one, so it won’t clutter up your ping-lists:

“the preference of Jacob over Esau and the hardening of the heart of the Pharao are cases of divine love toward the elect, when certain actors are caused to lead the elect toward their predestined path of good works.”

I think in your confusion you’ve totally embraced Reformed theology in these sentiments of yours. Albeit, a single predestination while still refusing the inevitable logic of the predestination to reprobation. (You cannot hold to one without the other.) Besides that, in fact, I can hardly disagree with them at all, but I suspect that you do not define your words as we do, since the Catholic view is not unconditional election, that is, that God chooses to give His grace to some, and these men are brought to salvation inevitably. It’s amazing how making you read something in context forces you to use such language though. Nevertheless, let’s examine your assertions. For example, what do you mean by “when certain actors are caused to lead the elect toward their predestined path of good works”? Do you mean that the vessels of wrath fulfill God’s purpose by leading the Vessels of mercy to salvation, or playing some other part in God’s plan? If you mean that, which is the Reformed position, then you do well, as we would understand it as saying that it is not by our works or faith that we receive grace, or by meeting certain conditions, but it is grace by which we meet His conditions. And God, of course, uses means, works against means, works without means, in order to accomplish His goals in our life, which are predestined and immutable. Or, as Augustine explains it,

“He promised not from the power of our will but from His own predestination. For He promised what He Himself would do, not what men would do. Because, although men do those good things which pertain to God’s worship, He Himself makes them to do what He has commanded; it is not they that cause Him to do what He has promised. Otherwise the fulfilment of God’s promises would not be in the power of God, but in that of men; and thus what was promised by God to Abraham would be given to Abraham by men themselves.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Ch. 19)

And again,

“When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. “But we say,” say they, “that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work.” But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, “We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who works all things” (Ephesians 1:11). He, therefore, works the beginning of our belief who works all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” (Romans 11:29) and of which it is said: “Not of works, but of Him that calls” (Romans 9:12). (Although He might have said, of Him that believes); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you” (John 15:16). For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Ch. 38)

Thus we understand, with Augustine, that we are saved not by our own willing and working, but by God who works in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Php 2:13). Thus no man is saved by his own determination, but by the will of God who brings us to salvation immutably, who “loved us,” and saved us, and plucked us out of the fire, when we were all children of destruction, and yet leaves others to their sins whom He chose not to save. Or as Augustine puts it,

“”So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy.” Thus both the twins were born children of wrath, not on account of any works of their own, but because they were bound in the fetters of that original condemnation which came through Adam. But He who said, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” loved Jacob of His undeserved grace, and hated Esau of His deserved judgment.” (Augustine, The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Ch. 98. Predestination to Eternal Life is Wholly of God’s Free Grace)

We do not say that God is the author of sin. But God, when He predestinates a person to eternal life, consequently chooses not to predestinate another to eternal life. Therefore, since no one is saved but by grace, then they are doomed only to destruction, and are justly predestinated to damnation. Not because God forced them to be evil, but because they were born dead and depraved due to the sin of Adam. Therefore, God is active in salvation of the elect, who must be changed in order to believe and to obey; and God merely lets the reprobate to remain in their sin, which He justly condemns them for. That said, of course, He does not let them do as they please; in fact, he shapes them up, and gives them gifts, and abilities, and prominence and power, and keeps them active, and brings good out of their evil. In other words, these men are sinners, and God has fitted them for His purpose, and they, using these gifts and these characteristics, sin of their own volition, yet God moves them and causes them to do His will. Or as Augustine explains it,

“It is, therefore, in the power of the wicked to sin; but that in sinning they should do this or that by that wickedness is not in their power, but in God’s, who divides the darkness and regulates it; so that hence even what they do contrary to God’s will is not fulfilled except it be God’s will. We read in the Acts of the Apostles that when the apostles had been sent away by the Jews, and had come to their own friends, and shown them what great things the priests and elders said to them, they all with one consent lifted up their voices to the Lord and said, “Lord, you are God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein; who, by the mouth of our father David, your holy servant, hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the peoples imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes were gathered together against the Lord, and against His Christ. For in truth, there have assembled together in this city against Your holy child Jesus, whom You have anointed, Herod and Pilate, and the people of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and counsel predestinated to be done.” See what is said: “As concerning the gospel,” indeed, “they are enemies for your sakes.” Because God’s hand and counsel predestinated such things to be done by the hostile Jews as were necessary for the gospel, for our sakes.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Ch. 33.— It is in the Power of Evil Men to Sin; But to Do This or That by Means of that Wickedness is in God’s Power Alone.)

Thus we conclude that though God is not the author of man’s sin, yet He has created the reprobate and uses them for His own good pleasure, to “shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,”(Rom 9:22-23). Or as Augustine puts it again,

“Thus, when reprobate angels and men are left to endure everlasting punishment, the saints shall know more fully the benefits they have received by grace. Then, in contemplation of the actual facts, they shall see more clearly the meaning of the expression in the psalms, “I will sing of mercy and judgment;” for it is only of unmerited mercy that any is redeemed, and only in well-merited judgment that any is condemned.” (Augustine, Handbook of faith, hope and love, Ch. 98)

What is there to fear then in this world, when all things are so ordered for our benefit? And what can the reprobate claim in defiance, since the free-gift is offered just as much to them as to us? Yet God does not actively save them, but leaves them damned, and in continual damnation, and to us continual glory.

“I don’t know what to add to my earlier post.”

In that case, just read my post again, or, rather, Augustine’s rebuke of you.

“The ending word is... occuring also in Acts 7:16, where is plainly translated as “laid” [in the sepulchre]. The fanciful “appointed” of King James translation is tendentious, and the original has no hint of anything being predestined to stumble.”

In other words, you work around only to say the same thing, since if one is “set” to disobedience and condemnation (since God does not save them, but rather fits them to destruction), they are just as well appointed to it, or established to it, or “set” to it, whichever you prefer.