The Trouble With Calvin – Pt. 1 [Total Depravity]

Tim Staples' Blog ^ | May 1, 2014 | Tim Staples

[GonzoII]

The Trouble With Calvin – Pt. 1

---

Over my next five blog posts, I am going to critique the famous “five points” of Calvinist theology: 1. Total Depravity 2. Unconditional Election 3. Limited Atonement 4. Irresistibility of Grace 5. Perseverance of the Saints (“Once Saved, Always Saved”).

Pt. 1 – Total Depravity

In John Calvin’s magnum opus, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin presents a view of man that is very much like Luther’s, but contrary to what we find in the pages of Sacred Scripture. Calvin used texts like Gen.6:5,

The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually,

and Romans 3:10ff,

None is righteous, no not one; no one understands, no one seeks for God. All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one…

in order to prove that man is totally and utterly depraved through the fall of Adam and Eve. Calvin’s conclusion from these texts and others was to say, “The will is so utterly vitiated and corrupted in every part as to produce nothing but evil” (Institutes, Bk. II, Chapter II, Para. 26).

What Say We?

The context of the texts Calvin used actually demonstrate the opposite of his claim. For example, if we read forward just four verses in Genesis 6, we find this:

But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord… Noah was a righteous (“just”) man, blameless in his generation (Gen. 6:8-9).

While we Catholics agree that God’s grace or “favor” was absolutely essential for Noah to be truly “just” before God; nevertheless, Noah was truly just, according to the text.

As far as the quote from Romans is concerned, the greater context of the entire epistle must be understood. One of the central themes of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans is the fact that it is through “the goodness of God” that we are led to repent (cf. Romans 2:4), to be justified (Romans 5:1-2), and persevere in the faith (cf. Romans 11:22). It is solely because of God’s grace that we can truly become just:

Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand and we rejoice in our hope of sharing the glory of God” (Romans 5:1-2).

Further,

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death…in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit (Romans 8:2-4).

Notice the emphasis on the fact that man is truly made just so much so that he can fulfill “the just requirement of the law.” It doesn’t get any more just, or righteous, than that!

Thus, Romans 3:10ff simply does not teach total depravity in a Calvinist sense. It cannot when the context is understood.

Moreover, if we examine the very verses where St. Paul paints his picture of the wicked who have “turned aside” and “done wrong,” we find he actually quotes Psalm 14:3. The next two verses of this Psalm explain who these “evil ones” are.

Have they no knowledge, all the evil-doers who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord? There they shall be in great terror, for God is with the generation of the righteous.

The Psalmist clearly refers to both evil-doers and “the righteous.”

The impetus of these and other texts from Romans tell us that Christ came to make us just, not that there are absolutely none who are just. We must stress again that it is because of the justice of Christ communicated to the faithful that their actions, and indeed, they themselves, are truly made just. But they indeed are truly made just.

Little children, let no one deceive you. He who does right (Gr.—ho poion tein dikaiousunein—the one doing justice) is righteous (Gr.—dikaios estin—is just), as he is righteous (Gr.—kathos ekeinos dikaios estin—as he is just) (I John 3:7).

There is no way the Scripture could be any clearer that the faithful are truly made just in their being and in their actions through the grace of Christ.

The Problem Magnified

More grave problems begin to arise when we begin to follow the path Calvin lays for us with his first principle. Even when considering the unregenerate Calvin is wrong about total depravity because Scripture tells us even those who are outside of the law can,

… do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts” (Romans 2:14-15).

Though Catholics agree with Calvinists that grace is necessary even for these who are ignorant of the law in order for them to be just before God—in other words this text is not saying these pagans can be justified apart from grace—the text does infer that nature is not totally depraved because man can clearly act justly on a natural level, or by nature.

But an even more grave error comes to the fore when we consider his notion of the depravity of the just. “Depravity of the just?” Yes. That was not a typo. According to John Calvin, even those who have been justified by Christ “cannot perform one work which, if judged on its own merits, is not deserving of condemnation” (Institutes, Bk. III, Ch. 9, Para. 9). How far from “he that acts justly is just” (I John 3:7) or the plain words of the Psalmist who uses similar words as found in Gen. 15:6 with regard to Abraham being justified by faith: “[Abraham] believed the Lord; and he reckoned it to him as righteousness,” in Psalm 106:30-31: “Then Phineas stood up and interposed, and the plague was stayed. And that has been reckoned to him as righteousness from generation to generation.”

Phineas was clearly justified by his works and not just by faith. In other words, Phineas’ works are truly “just as he is just” to use the words of I John 3:7.

There are a multitude of biblical texts that come to mind at this point, but what about the words of our Lord in Matthew 12:37, “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” Or, “by works a man is justified and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Or,

But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, “God, be merciful to me a sinner!” I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted (Luke 18:13-14).

These texts do not even come close to saying all of these works were “worthy of condemnation.” They say just the opposite!

We should be clear here: All “good works” man performs that contribute to his salvation are first and foremost God’s gifts, which, along with his cooperation, truly make him just and worthy to “walk with [Christ] in white; for [he is] worthy” (Rev. 3:4), by God’s grace and mercy. But we cannot escape the biblical fact that these works truly are just and they are truly the fruit of the just man himself.

The Problems Continue

Once Calvin deduces “total depravity” via poor exegesis of a relatively few texts of Scripture, all sorts of unbiblical notions follow. For example, Calvin also concludes from this that human nature is so totally depraved that free will is an impossibility. It’s a farce:

The grace offered by the Lord is not merely one which every individual has full liberty of choosing to receive or reject, but a grace which produces in the heart both choice and will (Institutes, Bk. II, Ch. 3, Para. 13).

According to Calvin, man’s total depravity means necessarily that he does not have the capacity to cooperate with God’s grace.

In fact, I argue that Calvin’s notion of grace and nature is a carbon copy of the theology of Sunni Islam. And I am far from alone in my conclusion. The famous Calvinist and anti-Catholic, Loraine Boettner, a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary, provides:

Dr. Samuel M. Zwemer, who in a very real sense can be referred to as “apostle to the Mohammedan World,” calls attention to the strange parallel between the Reformation in Europe under Calvin and that in Arabia under Mohammed. Says he: “Islam is indeed in many respects the Calvinism of the Orient. It, too, was a call to acknowledge the sovereignty of God’s will… It is this vital theistic principle that explains the victory of Islam over the weak divided and idolatrous Christendom of the Orient” (Boettner, The Doctrine of Predestination, p. 318-319).

Strange bedfellows? Perhaps not. Islam and Calvinism agree based not only upon a distorted notion of the sovereignty of God, but also because of a distorted notion of man’s depravity. The two are very similar.

Understanding the Strange

When John Calvin says man is utterly dependent upon God for every single just thought in his mind (see Institutes, Bk. II, Ch. II, Para. 27), Catholics will happily agree. And they would be correct. We do agree. However, appearances can be deceiving because there is more meaning beneath those words that Catholics cannot agree with.

With Calvin, there is no sense of grace aiding and empowering our wills as St. Augustine taught and the Catholic Church teaches. For Calvin, being “dependent upon God” means our free cooperation or free wills have no part to play. God does not merely empower our wills; he operates them.

In the end, this may well be the most disturbing idea stemming from Calvin’s notion of total depravity. Man is essentially a puppet of God’s, which led to Calvin attributing both the good and the evil actions of man to God.

And mind you, Calvin rejects and ridicules the Catholic notion of God merely permitting evil and working all things together for good. In his words:

Hence a distinction has been invented between doing and permitting, because to many it seemed altogether inexplicable how Satan and all the wicked are so under the hand and authority of God, that he directs their malice to whatever end he pleases… (Institutes, Bk. I, Ch. XVIII, Para. 1).

Evildoers do not commit acts of depravity in spite of the command of God, but because of the command of God, according to Calvin (Ibid. Para. 4)! In fact, Calvin uses Is. 45:7 and Amos 3:6 to teach that there is no evil that occurs that is not “impelled” by God’s positive command (Ibid. Para. 2).

God is the author of all those things which, according to these objectors, happen only by his inactive permission. He testifies that he creates light and darkness, forms good and evil (Is. [45:7]); that no evil happens which he hath not done (Amos [3:6]) (Ibid. Para. 3).

As Catholics we understand—as St. Paul teaches—“since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct” (Romans 1:28). This means God may well remove grace that is rejected. He may also hold back grace as well, but this is, as St. Augustine said, God’s “just judgment.” But, according to Calvin’s unbiblical teaching, God does not give grace in the first place and then “impels” men to act sinfully. As quoted above, according to Calvin, God causes evil. And we are not talking about physical evil here; we are talking about moral evil. That is categorically absurd! God cannot “do” or “impel” moral evil because He is infinitely and absolutely good!

God cannot lie (Heb. 6:8, Number 23:19), “he cannot deny Himself” (II Timothy 2:13)—or act contrary to His nature. If God’s nature is one of love and pure being, it is absurd to say that he can “do” evil, which is by nature a lack of some perfection that ought to be present in a given nature. In fact, James 1:13 tells us that God not only cannot cause this kind of evil, but he cannot even tempt anyone with evil. That is contrary to his nature.

The Bottom Line

When Is. 45:7 and Amos 3:6 say God “creates evil” and “does evil,” this must be seen only in a sense in which it does not contradict God’s nature and what is clearly revealed to us about God in Scripture. God can directly cause physical evil, such as the ten plagues he released against Egypt in Exodus. But this was an act of justice, which in and of itself was morally upright and justified. We can also say that God permits evil in view of the fact that he chose to create us with freedom. But even there, God only permits evil in view of his promise to bring good out of that evil as is most profoundly demonstrated through the greatest evil in the history of the world—the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ. Through this greatest evil God brings about the greatest good—the redemption of the world. God did not kill Christ, nor did he “impel” anyone to kill Christ. But by virtue of his omnipotence, he brings good out of the evil acts committed.

[Elsie]

HOW many decades has the C vs A argument been going now?

Free Republic dudes are NOT going to settle it any time soon.

Can’t we get back to the Counting the angels, dancing on a pin-head, thread??

[Gamecock]

So what shall we talk about? The Mormon vs. Christian thingy? The Catholic vs. Prods? Those have all been going on since I was a noob and certainly haven't been resolved.

I know!

CLOSE THE RELIGION FORUM!

[Mr Rogers]

” We are, again, back into these same verses which you will not deal with in any substantive way. And they are these:

But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” (Joh 6:64-65)”

I have dealt with 6:37 ad nauseaum. There is nothing in 6:37 remotely suggesting Calvin’s theory of election. It simply says those the Father gives the Son, while not specifying ANY constraint IN THAT VERSE on who those may be. However, the 3rd sentence after that one DOES say: “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.””

If you will not pay attention to verses separated by just 2 sentences, then I doubt I will have much luck explaining anything involving paragraphs or pages. However, verses 64 & 65 are right next to each other, so let’s try:

” 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

So we know why he said “no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father” - because “Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him”.

Yep, he knew, from before time, that Judas would betray him. And Judas was among the 12.

Are there men whom God has given over to destruction, and whom he will not give any chance of repenting?

Yes. In Romans 1, we read:

“Ever since God created the world, his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen; they are perceived in the things that God has made. So those people have no excuse at all! 21 They know God, but they do not give him the honor that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness. 22 They say they are wise, but they are fools; 23 instead of worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles.

24 And so God has given those people over to do the filthy things their hearts desire...Because those people refuse to keep in mind the true knowledge about God, he has given them over to corrupted minds, so that they do the things that they should not do. 29 They are filled with all kinds of wickedness...”

God knows the future before it happens, but these verses go much further. They say God knows each individual’s heart as we cannot. We cannot say Saul is lost forever, because we don’t know the road to Damascus lies ahead of him...but God does know. And God apparently does abandon men, possibly in large numbers. If you look at the result of being abandoned by God you see:

“29 They are filled with all kinds of wickedness, evil, greed, and vice; they are full of jealousy, murder, fighting, deceit, and malice. They gossip 30 and speak evil of one another; they are hateful to God, insolent, proud, and boastful; they think of more ways to do evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no conscience; they do not keep their promises, and they show no kindness or pity for others.”

That sounds like a lot of Americans, in increasing numbers since our nation turned its collective back on God and gave God the middle finger salute. This may have something to do with Gamecock’s question about the lost, although no human can say with certainty.

God can and does give men over to their sin, and the phrase ‘hardens their hearts’ suggests he pushes them further in the direction they want to go, so that their evil will be apparent to all.

In John 6, Jesus knew full well that much of his audience had no intention of EVER following him. John 6 shows God hardening their hearts - nudging them on until it is apparent on the outside what was already on the inside. And He was and is just to do so, because God KNOWS!

Have you ever witnessed to someone, and felt the Holy Spirit tell you to walk away? Have you ever witnessed to someone, and been almost surprised to hear your words pushing them into greater resistance? While that could be our carnal flesh rising to the surface, it is not always. Consider Acts 13:

36 For David served God’s purposes in his own time, and then he died, was buried with his ancestors, and his body rotted in the grave. 37 But this did not happen to the one whom God raised from death. 38-39 All of you, my fellow Israelites, are to know for sure that it is through Jesus that the message about forgiveness of sins is preached to you; you are to know that everyone who believes in him is set free from all the sins from which the Law of Moses could not set you free. 40 Take care, then, so that what the prophets said may not happen to you:

41 ‘Look, you scoffers! Be astonished and die!
For what I am doing today
is something that you will not believe,
even when someone explains it to you!’”

{A week later]: But Paul and Barnabas spoke out even more boldly: “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken first to you. But since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we will leave you and go to the Gentiles.”

Those were not the modern church, trying to sweet-talk everyone to Jesus. Nor can we, and nor should we try. We should stay true to the message the Lord has given in His Word, and follow the Holy Spirit. If our words then give offense...well, many people have been abandoned by God, whose perfect knowledge allows Him to do so.

At some point it may well be true of most men, and maybe from before birth since God knows all: there are men God will no longer try to save.

Please remember that a part of my argument is that conversion ALWAYS starts with God’s initiative, by God revealing Himself to man. And if God has decided that someone - or even some tribe, or some peoples somewhere - will not repent, then God can and does justly give those people over to their own sin.

Indeed, we are warned to take care ourselves:

“My friends, be careful that none of you have a heart so evil and unbelieving that you will turn away from the living God. 13 Instead, in order that none of you be deceived by sin and become stubborn, you must help one another every day, as long as the word “Today” in the scripture applies to us. 14 For we are all partners with Christ if we hold firmly to the end the confidence we had at the beginning.

15 This is what the scripture says:

“If you hear God’s voice today,
do not be stubborn, as your ancestors were
when they rebelled against God.”

16 Who were the people who heard God’s voice and rebelled against him? All those who were led out of Egypt by Moses. 17 With whom was God angry for forty years? With the people who sinned, who fell down dead in the desert.”

It also says:

“For how can those who abandon their faith be brought back to repent again? They were once in God’s light; they tasted heaven’s gift and received their share of the Holy Spirit; 5 they knew from experience that God’s word is good, and they had felt the powers of the coming age. 6 And then they abandoned their faith! It is impossible to bring them back to repent again, because they are again crucifying the Son of God and exposing him to public shame.

7 God blesses the soil which drinks in the rain that often falls on it and which grows plants that are useful to those for whom it is cultivated. 8 But if it grows thorns and weeds, it is worth nothing; it is in danger of being cursed by God and will be destroyed by fire.”

In this sense, it is absolutely true that there are men long past salvation. God will not try to draw them, but will save them up for destruction. But this is not because God has a List of Names, with those He will save and give life to independent of their repentance and believing. They will go to hell, not because God refused to put their names on list, but because God knows there is no hope of repentance in them. They are ‘bad soil’, if you will.

No one CAN come to the Son unless the Father reaches out to them first, and reveals Himself to them and draws (urges, entices - not compulsion) them to Jesus. Everyone has had at least SOME knowledge of God to draw them - the natural revelation Paul speaks of in Romans 1. No one has any excuse for not realizing that there must be a god somewhere who has created order and who is worthy of our worship.

But the extent to which God gives more detailed revelation of Himself to individual men is up to God, not to us. Scripture doesn’t give us a detailed accounting because scripture is not a systematic theology text. It is there to give life to men, not to make them proud of their knowledge. Its purpose is to convict and convince, not to make us vain and boastful.

None of this suggests Calvinism’s predestination, where God’s List of Names has nothing to do with the man himself, only with God deciding to save some (and therefor give them life, and after that faith) while choosing to damn others for His pleasure.

However, it is consistent with God drawing some [“figuratively, of a strong pull in the mental or moral life draw, attract (JN 6.44)”]. And those who believe (verse 40, after verse 37: “everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life”) DO come, and are placed “in Christ”, and are grafted into the Chosen People of God.

However, even in grafting we are warned: “Here we see how kind and how severe God is. He is severe toward those who have fallen, but kind to you—if you continue in his kindness. But if you do not, you too will be broken off. 23 And if the Jews abandon their unbelief, they will be put back in the place where they were; for God is able to do that. 24 You Gentiles are like the branch of a wild olive tree that is broken off and then, contrary to nature, is joined to a cultivated olive tree. The Jews are like this cultivated tree; and it will be much easier for God to join these broken-off branches to their own tree again.”

Those verses make no sense under Calvinism, but make total sense in the context of the entire Bible.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

So we know why he said “no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father” - because “Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him”. Yep, he knew, from before time, that Judas would betray him. And Judas was among the 12.

The verse does not say that Christ's explanation for their unbelief is "because" He foreknew anything. The parenthesis is not Christ's words, but John explaining how He could know that they were unbelievers:

Joh 6:64 But there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) Joh 6:65 And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."

Christ's statements to the unbelievers is exactly this: "There are some of you who do not believe... This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." Christ knew that they did not believe, and that is why He told them what He did. The parenthesis is not an explanation for what He told them. It is an explanation for how He knew they were unbelievers, since none had yet walked away.

I have dealt with 6:37 ad nauseaum. There is nothing in 6:37 remotely suggesting Calvin’s theory of election. It simply says those the Father gives the Son, while not specifying ANY constraint IN THAT VERSE on who those may be.

John 6:37 constrains all those who come to the Son as having been given by the Father, and that this "giving" by the Father is infallible. All of them do come and are not cast out. It is a promise that they will be drawn, and, once drawn, will not be dangled loose and off into the dump somewhere. Hence Christ in the following verses then promises that He will "raise them up," and that He will raise up all those who are given to Him.

And God apparently does abandon men, possibly in large numbers. If you look at the result of being abandoned by God you see:

That sounds like a lot of Americans, in increasing numbers since our nation turned its collective back on God...

These verses aren't about Americans. They are about the whole human race. Hence "all have sinned and come short of God," and "there are none who seek or understand God," and "None are righteous, no not one." This is a wickedness that we have already in the womb, not after some later sin. Gamecock's question is about those who have never heard the Gospel, and therefore they could not have turned their back on a God they've never heard of.

In John 6, Jesus knew full well that much of his audience had no intention of EVER following him....In this sense, it is absolutely true that there are men long past salvation. God will not try to draw them, but will save them up for destruction.

Just to confirm: You are saying that Christ does not "draw" or "grant" it to all men, because He foreknows they would reject it anyway? This changes your view on John 6:37 and 64-65, as it agrees with my view entirely, except you are inserting foreknowledge as an artificial explanation for why my view is correct.

[Mr Rogers]

“And he said, “This is why...”

Yep, no explanation there at all. “This is why...” was tossed in for no good reason. Right!

Here is verse 37 in context:

““Those who come to me will never be hungry; those who believe in me will never be thirsty. 36 Now, I told you that you have seen me but will not believe. 37 Everyone whom my Father gives me will come to me. I will never turn away anyone who comes to me, 38 because I have come down from heaven to do not my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day. 40 For what my Father wants is that all who see the Son and believe in him should have eternal life. And I will raise them to life on the last day.”

It is about believing, not about being pre-selected before time, with no regard to your response to God’s initiative. The Father gives the Son those who believe. Why? Because that is what the paragraph is about: believing!

“These verses aren’t about Americans. They are about the whole human race.”

Golly! You mean Paul wasn’t specifically writing about 2014 America? No kidding!

“You are saying that Christ does not “draw” or “grant” it to all men, because He foreknows they would reject it anyway? This changes your view on John 6:37 and 64-65, as it agrees with my view entirely...”

It does NOT agree with Calvin, because Calvin rejected God’s knowledge of a man’s willingness to repent as a reason why some are saved and others are not. Do you now agree with Arminius, that those saved are saved because they responded to God’s initiative by believing, and believing, they were given life?

---

3. Do you believe that a person can resist the convicting power of God’s grace?

• If you answered yes, then again you affirm another one of the central tenets of Arminianism, as reflected in Jesus’ words, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often I have longed to gather your children together…but you were not willing” (Matt 23:37)
• Calvinists argue that God has determined which individuals will believe; to make their faith possible, he calls them to salvation in such a way that their own wills are overpowered so that they cannot possibly resist the call to salvation
• Arminians believe that God truly wants every one to believe; but when God enables a person to believe, he does so in such a way that the individual still can resist the convicting power of the Spirit–faith is not a necessary outcome of God’s enabling grace

4. Do you believe that you are born again when you put your faith in Jesus?

• If you answered yes, then you hold to a major tenet of Arminianism and you probably are not a Calvinist
• Calvinists believe that God must first give a person new life to enable faith; without first being made to share the new life, they think that a person cannot believe
• Arminians argue that people are not given the gift of the new life until they believe
• Arminians hold that when a person believes, he is united with Christ and only then does he partake of the new life and is born again; a person does not share in the new life without first being united with Christ by faith, for “whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16)

5. Do you believe in election?

• If you answered yes, then you might be an Arminian
• Calvinists believe in an election independent of faith
• Arminians believe that election is “in Christ;” i.e., anyone who is “in Christ” is elect, but that faith is essential to become united with Christ. Therefore, election is conditioned upon faith

6. Do you believe in predestination?

• If you answered yes, then you might be an Arminian
• Arminians assert that believers are predestined to final salvation, not that people are predestined to believe

http://evangelicalarminians.org/survey-are-you-an-arminian-and-dont-even-know-it-2/

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

It does NOT agree with Calvin, because Calvin rejected God’s knowledge of a man’s willingness to repent as a reason why some are saved and others are not. Do you now agree with Arminius, that those saved are saved because they responded to God’s initiative by believing, and believing, they were given life?

This is a diversion. You already know my position. I need you to answer my question please:

“Just to confirm: You are saying that Christ does not “draw” or “grant” it to all men, because He foreknows they would reject it anyway?"

Does God grant it or "draw" all men, yes or no? This is in response to your statement that He does not, but seems to do so selectively on individuals based on His knowledge of who would accept it if He did. I just want to make sure you're going to stick with this before we continue.

Golly! You mean Paul wasn’t specifically writing about 2014 America? No kidding!

Your folly is that you make light of original sin. You put a later sin as the cause of man's alienation from God, and not our sin nature which we are born with, and you still say nothing to the question of those who never knew Christ.

[Mr Rogers]

“Does God grant it or “draw” all men, yes or no? This is in response to your statement that He does not, but seems to do so selectively on individuals based on His knowledge of who would accept it if He did.”

False dilemma. Do he draw all equally, without reference to all He knows? No. Does He draw all at least somewhat? Yes. The creation around us screams out the existence and worship worthiness of the Creator. Remember, draw does not equal compel. It does not mean an irresistible drawing that forces obedience.

“Now is the time for this world to be judged; now the ruler of this world will be overthrown. 32 When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to me.” - John 12

However, has He abandoned some who have rejected Him? According to Paul & the writer of Hebrews, that answer is yes.

Calvin wanted his systematic theology to be black & white, with neat answers to everything. But in man is complex, the Infinite God is vastly more so, and He has not chosen to give us every detail of His dealings with every human.

“Your folly is that you make light of original sin.”

Citing modern America hardly does that.

“you still say nothing to the question of those who never knew Christ.”

On the contrary, I’ve given my opinion on the subject, while neither you nor Gamecock have given your belief. I have been far more explicit in discussing my beliefs than you have in yours.

Calvin claimed that the vast majority of men are condemned to hell, not because they rejected any revelation of God, but because it pleases God to send them to hell. He claimed those saved are saved, not because they responded to God’s revelation with belief, but without any regard for anything they did. That view makes a liar of God, who said it did depend on repenting and believing, not on some list of names.

I don’t know what your belief is, because you have not been very explicit about yours - only attacking mine.

[af_vet_1981]

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

Each of the twelve apostles came to Jesus, as it is written, and he did not cast any of them out. One of them chose to betray him. Do you think he had no other choice ?

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

False dilemma. Do he draw all equally, without reference to all He knows? No. Does He draw all at least somewhat? Yes. The creation around us screams out the existence and worship worthiness of the Creator. Remember, draw does not equal compel. It does not mean an irresistible drawing that forces obedience.

Your previous statement:

"In John 6, Jesus knew full well that much of his audience had no intention of EVER following him....In this sense, it is absolutely true that there are men long past salvation. God will not try to draw them, but will save them up for destruction.

You need to make up your mind on this. So if God foreknows that there are people who will "never" follow Him, and you say He will then not bother to draw them because they are "beyond" salvation, how do you now turn around and say that they are drawn to some degree, but on a lesser level? Does God "start a work in someone" only to not finish it, knowing it is in vain to begin with?

Php_1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

But, more importantly, you are still ignoring my points. You need to answer these questions:

1) Does John 6:37 mean anything in that it is declared that All who are given by the Father to the Son do come to Him, and these same who "come" are in no wise cast out? Are these people preserved? And do all of them actually come? Why or why not?

2) When Christ states that "There are some of you that disbelieve... That is why I told you, no one can come to me unless my Father grants it." Can you explain why we should not connect these statement? Is the latter an explanation for the former (the unbelief), yes or no? And, if they were drawn to the Son "unequally," why does Christ here sound like they were never granted it by the Father to come to the Son? When does the drawing happen, and how, if you believe this, is it different or separate from the "granting" or the "giving" of the Father? Can someone be 'drawn' to the Son, and then "given" to the Son so that they may "come" in response to their positive reaction to the drawing? If this sounds confusing, it's because you have yet to give any explanation for any of these terms and their relationship with each other.

Remember, draw does not equal compel.

Why do you keep repeating this as if I've said otherwise? But how is one "drawn" and yet not "drawn"?

“Now is the time for this world to be judged; now the ruler of this world will be overthrown. 32 When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to me.” - John 12

How do you reconcile this verse with John 6 (provided you answered my questions prior to coming to this question) or with John 17:9?

Joh_17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

If these verses indicate that Christ did not come to draw all men, but only to receive those whom the Father gives to Him, then the explanation for this verse is: By "all men" is meant every sort of man, as the Jews are prone to speaking.

On the contrary, I’ve given my opinion on the subject, while neither you nor Gamecock have given your belief.

Your opinion was "God is just, that is all I'll say." And I have indeed given my view. I even condemned you for claiming that there is salvation outside of Jesus Christ for it. Don't you remember?

Calvin claimed that the vast majority of men are condemned to hell, not because they rejected any revelation of God, but because it pleases God to send them to hell.

Can you please quote the relevant letter or passage from his Institutes? Or from Luther's On the Bondage of the Will? Or any of the Reformers? We teach that men are dead in sin and are voluntary sinners and rebels. We do not teach that they do not reject revelation. We teach that they reject revelation, that is, unless God intervenes to save them. But when God intervenes, He does not fail in this process. This is where we differ.

He claimed those saved are saved, not because they responded to God’s revelation with belief, but without any regard for anything they did.

This is exactly correct!

That view makes a liar of God, who said it did depend on repenting and believing, not on some list of names.

How does it make God a liar? The former does not logically lead to the latter. All those whom God saves most certainly repent and believe, and the offer is freely made to the world itself. But the world rejects it, and in so doing the enemies of Christ lose any excuse they have. We do not teach that anyone is compelled to sin or to reject God. We teach that men are born in sin and in rejection of God, and they happily continue to do this, so that if God does not intervene, none would accept His mercy, because they simply do not want it.

I don’t know what your belief is, because you have not been very explicit about yours - only attacking mine.

Says the guy who told me 'God is just, and that is all I'll have to say," and then goes on thumping his chest about how much he explained himself!

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Each of the twelve apostles came to Jesus, as it is written, and he did not cast any of them out. One of them chose to betray him. Do you think he had no other choice ?

What do you mean by "Do you think he had no other choice?" There is a difference in physically coming to Jesus, and those who are given by the Father to the Son infallibly. Christ already knew that Judas was not a true believer and was not "of His flock." It is because Judas was not of God that He, ultimately, is God's enemy. Because the world is at war with God, and not because God forces them to be at war with Him.

[Mr Rogers]

“You need to make up your mind on this. So if God foreknows that there are people who will “never” follow Him, and you say He will then not bother to draw them because they are “beyond” salvation, how do you now turn around and say that they are drawn to some degree, but on a lesser level?”

I have explained it in detail, using paragraphs. I see no hope of explaining it in sufficiently short words and sentences for every poster to read with understanding. So I’m going to quit trying to explain to you for now, for the same reason I sometimes walk away from someone I am witnessing to...

---

Me: He claimed those saved are saved, not because they responded to God’s revelation with belief, but without any regard for anything they did.

You: This is exactly correct!

That is utterly contrary to scripture. God repeatedly says we are saved by grace through faith. He says to repent and believe as the condition for salvation. And he never says he has a ‘secret will’ to irresistibly give faith and belief to people after giving them life, because their names were on a list.

God very explicitly says, again and again, what man must do to be saved. Yes...what man must do. It is in response to God, but it IS a response. It is done by the man who repents (turns away) and believes the promise of God (faith). It is a verb, not a description of something done to a man.

Hundreds of times, the Bible explains what man must do to be saved. I cannot make Calvin accept the Word of God, and I see no point in continuing to repeat what you refuse to listen to. It is rather like discussing math with my dog...

[af_vet_1981]

What do you mean by "Do you think he had no other choice?" There is a difference in physically coming to Jesus, and those who are given by the Father to the Son infallibly. Christ already knew that Judas was not a true believer and was not "of His flock." It is because Judas was not of God that He, ultimately, is God's enemy. Because the world is at war with God, and not because God forces them to be at war with Him.

I meant, "Do you think Judas had no other choice than to betray the LORD ?" Of course, this question also implies "Do you think Judas had an opportunity to be saved and enter into eternal life ?" These questions can be simply answered with "Yes" or "No."

As for the other point about the promise, I understand it as Judas initially came to faith and participated in the ministry of the Apostles. The LORD never cast him out; he chose to leave, chose to betray, and in effect cast himself out.

[af_vet_1981]

I also notice John's account has these points:
1. Jesus' teaching about the bread and wine being his body and blood caused many of his disciples to choose to leave him.
2. Jesus chose Judas.
3. No one can come to Jesus unless the Father gives him the grace to do so.
4. It may have been at this time that Judas, who had initially believed, now chose not to believe (like the other disciples). His lack of persevering faith provided an opportunity for more sin (stealing money from that given for the poor) and led to his choice to betray the Messiah.

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

I have explained it in detail, using paragraphs.

No, you have expressed your conclusion, but you haven't answered my questions, just like now. And every time we debate on this matter, I will shove those questions in your face until you answer them.

That is utterly contrary to scripture. God repeatedly says we are saved by grace through faith.

Grace by definition is gratuitous, which means it is undeserved. It is given freely without the recipient in any way deserving it. We are saved by grace through faith, and faith itself is the gift of God. Hence:

Eph_2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

The 'that' here is in reference to faith, since grace is already the gift of God. It be a tautology otherwise. Either faith is worked in mankind, or else there is something "good" and spiritual in mankind that makes them to differ from other people. But we do not differ from the rest of mankind, and until God works in us both to "will and to do," we cannot believe, no matter how much persuasion is used. It is because we are dead in our sins, and are happy to be dead, and unwilling to listen to the truth.

[metmom]

You need to make up your mind on this. So if God foreknows that there are people who will "never" follow Him, and you say He will then not bother to draw them because they are "beyond" salvation, how do you now turn around and say that they are drawn to some degree, but on a lesser level? Does God "start a work in someone" only to not finish it, knowing it is in vain to begin with?

I do not see it as inconsistent that God would draw ALL men, even knowing that some will never respond, no matter what.

It is not in vain that He draws them. When they stand before Him, they will have NO excuse.

God is merciful to the just and the unjust, He sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

In some respect ALL men are being drawn to Him by His mercy and grace even by the simple fact that He has not struck them dead for their sin as they stand.

Scripture says that God desires ALL men to come to a saving knowledge of Himself.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

I'm going with the plain and simple reading of the verse. All means all.

If He wants all men to come to know Him, He will give everyone a chance, even if it's just one.

So the options are that HE either gives everyone a chance but not all respond. Or He picks and chooses, which simply cannot fit with His desire that all men be saved, because if His will is irresistible, then all men WOULD be saved because who can thwart His will?

And we know that all men aren't saved.

God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. I just cannot reconcile that with a God who would say all that and then choose to send some people to hell, or not ever give them the chance.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

I meant, "Do you think Judas had no other choice than to betray the LORD ?" Of course, this question also implies "Do you think Judas had an opportunity to be saved and enter into eternal life ?" These questions can be simply answered with "Yes" or "No."

The obvious answer is: Yes, Judas had both choice and opportunity to be saved, as is every one. But the question is not choice and opportunity, but rather willingness. Does man have the willingness to truly place their faith in Christ without the Holy Spirit? The answer is no. The debate in this thread, though I think I've been the only one debating it, as I keep getting accused of denying that "faith" even exists, is whether any whom God reveals Himself to can either refuse or be lost, and whether this effectual "revelation" is universal.

As for the other point about the promise, I understand it as Judas initially came to faith and participated in the ministry of the Apostles.

Judas was always accounted a "thief" and a "devil," and is never referred to as actually being one of Christ's. Those who are regenerated by the Holy Spirit, though we are sinners, can never fall away, nor behave as willful sinners as Judas did.

Joh_12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

Joh 6:70 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil."

The choosing of Christ here does not imply their salvation, as the giving of the Father to the Son is separate in His teaching, and is defined always in absolute terms. Either you come to Christ an are risen up, because He will lose "none" of those who are given to Him, or you are not.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

I'm going with the plain and simple reading of the verse. All means all.

See post #104 and #63

If He wants all men to come to know Him, He will give everyone a chance, even if it's just one.

Herein lies the rub. Are you confident that everyone will receive a chance to be saved? Even those who are, perhaps, on some island somewhere? How can they believe when they have not heard? I know for a fact that there are people, even in American cities, who are so ignorant of Christianity that they do not even know that Christ claims to be God, and so wicked and God-hating, as I once was, that they didn't care to learn it. Have they received a "chance?" What is their chance? It certainly is not the flash of illumination that most of us can report to when hearing the Gospel for the first time. There is no "kicking of the pricks," there is only indifference or worse. So, then, are you confident that everyone has actually gotten a "chance?"

God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. I just cannot reconcile that with a God who would say all that and then choose to send some people to hell, or not ever give them the chance.

But consider this. If God is required to give them a "chance," isn't this the same thing as saying that God is required to show them mercy? Or, at least, the "mercy" of giving them a chance? Yet, read Romans 9. Is Paul's argument that God is required to "show mercy" on everyone, or is it that He will "show mercy on whom He will show mercy"?

And why do we assume that God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked if He will cast them into hell? You yourself must deal with this question, since, if God knows already that you will not believe, why does He allow you to be born? But what does the scripture say?

"But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 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, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? (Rom 9:20-24)

Pro_16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

What if God allows the birth of the wicked, and creates them for Himself, and raises them up for His own purpose, in order to serve a greater purpose? That though these will be punished, yes, and will commit much evil in their lives, yes, but out of this darkness God will bring a greater light? If God will bring a greater good out of this, in not only creating the wicked but in using them to fulfill His purpose, what is wrong with that?

The question of course comes to whether they deserve it. But by definition they all do deserve it, because they are of this world, and sin with this world, and will die with this world. And though God could have put an end to our race when Adam fell, so that no sinners would have been born thereafter, yet He chose to allow all of these things to fill up the number of His elect. Mankind exists then not to have God to please their purposes, but for God's purpose and Kingdom alone.

[af_vet_1981]

Judas was always accounted a "thief" and a "devil," and is never referred to as actually being one of Christ's.

Just looking at the textual evidence it seems first mention of Judas being a devil is in John 6 which would make it in or near Jerusalem the end of his second year of ministry, the Passover before his last. John 12 and Luke 22 are first mention of his having been a thief, so I assume Judas made his decision at the time of John 6. Judas was one of Messiah's chosen Apostles. He called him and he responded, but he did not persevere and he chose to betray him. I see free will involved here. Of course I could be wrong, and we will find out.

[af_vet_1981]

The choosing of Christ here does not imply their salvation,

True, we have the parable of the sower. One must persevere in the faith to be saved. Being in full communion with the saints and loving the brethren is a very good indication.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

John 12 and Luke 22 are first mention of his having been a thief, so I assume Judas made his decision at the time of John 6. Judas was one of Messiah's chosen Apostles. He called him and he responded, but he did not persevere and he chose to betray him. I see free will involved here. Of course I could be wrong, and we will find out.

You're wrong for a couple of reasons. First, in making the assumption. And, secondly, in the wording of the verse:

But there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." (Joh 6:64-65)

Christ was speaking to people who had heretofore followed Him:

Joh 6:66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.

But He does not speak of them as having received it from the Father to believe, and then of rejecting. His reply to them is that He knew their unbelief, telling them so, and then saying "That is why I told you that no one can come to me... etc". Their faithlessness in His message is explained by that statement, which puts their unbelief not on a failure in God's "granting" or "giving" or saving, but in the lack of it.