Believe in Christ, not in the Reformed doctrines of men, Dr. E.
Posted on 02/28/2010 8:30:39 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
John Calvin's 16th century reply to medieval Catholicism's buy-your-way-out-of-purgatory excesses is Evangelicalism's latest success story, complete with an utterly sovereign and micromanaging deity, sinful and puny humanity, and the combination's logical consequence, predestination: the belief that before time's dawn, God decided whom he would save (or not), unaffected by any subsequent human action or decision.
Calvinism, cousin to the Reformation's other pillar, Lutheranism, is a bit less dour than its critics claim: it offers a rock-steady deity who orchestrates absolutely everything, including illness (or home foreclosure!), by a logic we may not understand but don't have to second-guess. Our satisfaction — and our purpose — is fulfilled simply by "glorifying" him. In the 1700s, Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards invested Calvinism with a rapturous near mysticism. Yet it was soon overtaken in the U.S. by movements like Methodism that were more impressed with human will. Calvinist-descended liberal bodies like the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) discovered other emphases, while Evangelicalism's loss of appetite for rigid doctrine — and the triumph of that friendly, fuzzy Jesus — seemed to relegate hard-core Reformed preaching (Reformed operates as a loose synonym for Calvinist) to a few crotchety Southern churches.
No more. Neo-Calvinist ministers and authors don't operate quite on a Rick Warren scale. But, notes Ted Olsen, a managing editor at Christianity Today, "everyone knows where the energy and the passion are in the Evangelical world" — with the pioneering new-Calvinist John Piper of Minneapolis, Seattle's pugnacious Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler, head of the Southern Seminary of the huge Southern Baptist Convention. The Calvinist-flavored ESV Study Bible sold out its first printing, and Reformed blogs like Between Two Worlds are among cyber-Christendom's hottest links.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
That is Hallmark; not Scripture. Where does faith come from?
And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart." -- Jeremiah 24:6-7 "For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up.
Does God give all men eyes to see and ears to hear the truth and love the truth? Does God give all men "a heart to know Him?"
"Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." -- Matthew 15:13
Are all men "planted by God?"
Amen. All glory to God for his all-accomplishing grace given to sinners who don’t know Him unless and until He chooses to reveal Himself to them.
This I agree with. I understand the the whole question is one of those mysteries we won't fully understand until we get there, but some positions on this are too outrageous.
I entered into these discussions years ago when a calvinist "mourned" that many of the aborted babies are going to hell without a chance to repent.
I took serious offense at that.
I know there are many out there that can’t swallow the truth about calvin and who have reams of support for his Lie...But I am telling YOU in the Name of Jesus that Calvin is wrong.
Calvin denies our free will....and many use him to support “once saved always saved”...another lie straight from the pit.
if you live long enough you will see this scripture come to life as I have.
“Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being assembled to meet him ... Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion [in the original greek: apostasy - ‘great falling away’] comes first, and the lawless [one] is revealed, the son of perdition...” 2 Thess 2:1,3
and then again here-—
“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils...” 1 Timothy 4:1
I hope you are both well reconciled to the death of your child. I cannot be sorry for the death of infants. How many storms do they escape! Nor can I doubt, in my private judgment, that they are included in the election of grace.
Article 17: The Salvation of the Infants of Believers Since we must make judgments about God's will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.
On September 29, 1861, the great Baptist pastor, Charles Spurgeon, preached a message entitled “Infant Salvation.” In that message he chastened some critics who had “. . . wickedly, lyingly, and slanderously said of Calvinists that we believe that some little children perish.” Similar rumblings have been heard in some Baptist circles of late. Spurgeon affirmed that God saved little ones without limitation and without exception. He, then, as was his manner, turned to conclude the message with an evangelistic appeal to parents who might be lost. Listen to his plea:Westminster Confession of Faith, Ch. X, para 3:Many of you are parents who have children in heaven. Is it not a desirable thing that you should go there too? And yet, have I not in these galleries and in this area some, perhaps many, who have no hope hereafter? . . . . Mother, unconverted mother, from the battlements of heaven your child beckons you to Paradise. Father, ungodly, impenitent father, the little eyes that once looked joyously on you, look down upon you now and the lips which had scarcely learned to call you “Father” ere they were sealed by the silence of death, may be heard as with a still, small voice, saying to you this morning, “Father, must we be forever divided by the great gulf which no man can pass?” If you wilt, think of these matters, perhaps the heart will begin to move, and the eyes may begin to flow and then may the Holy Spirit put before thine eyes the cross of the Savior . . . if thou wilt turn thine eye to Him, thou shalt live . . .
Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who works when, and where, and how He pleases: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the WordLondon Baptist Confession, Ch. X, para 3:
Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. ( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )
Why? Where in Scripture does it say all dead infants are elect? Please don't quote other calvinists--that's just opinion. Back it up with Scripture like the Reformed are fond of claiming they do.
Snippets of Scripture do not explain Scripture; out of context snippets are used as slogans for those who do not understand Scipture. You frequently post the fragment of verse 36. It does not mean what you say it means. It means what Jesus says it means. I oughta introduce you to Jesus.
Matthew 22: 37 He said to him, 22 "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. 38 This is the greatest and the first commandment. 39 The second is like it: 23 You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
John 13: 34 I give you a new commandment: 12 love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. 35 This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."
Mark 8: 34 He summoned the crowd with his disciples and said 8 to them, "Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. 35 For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and that of the gospel 9 will save it. 36 What profit is there for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? 37 What could one give in exchange for his life? 38 Whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this faithless and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."
I proclaim the word of Jesus to the entire world, not to the self described elite.
The Confession seems to imply that there is such a thing as an "un-elect" infant. It certainly does not claim that all babies who die are elect, but that only the "elect" infants will be saved. The implication is clear that the WCF does not endorse the idea that all children who die are going to escape eternal hell, but only the "elect infants", whoever they are.
Can you show me a Calvinistic Confession that categorically states that God elects or has elected all children who die before a certain age?
If not, then maybe you can explain to me how a Reformed Pastor can assure a grieving parent that her child is now in the arms of Jesus. If a Reformed Pastor is true to his Calvinism, he must state that it is quite possible that their child was created as a "vessel of wrath, fitted for destruction."
Am I wrong?
Educate me.
Why do you agree to it? What use is the Gospel to the Reformed? If the elect are predestined for salvation, what effect does the Gospel have for them? If the reprobate are predestined for hell, what effect does the Gospel have for them?
God shows His great love by choosing to save even ONE of us since none of us can merit Heaven. There is no Biblical rule saying that God can only have great love if He loves all people equally.
Nobody says that He does. The parable of the talents shows otherwise. However, He does give all talents ie the means for salvation.
However, the Bible is clear that not all people are God's children.
No; those are the Jews. The Gentiles are able to be grafted into the true vine.
And when you criticize "limited love" and "limited mercy" don't forget that your own versions of God's love and mercy are VERY limited too in that you require acts of men to get (or earn) that love and mercy.
Negative. I'm surprised after your extended talks with Kolo that you would say this. God love and mercy are unlimited. His atonement extends to all men. There is no earning; but there is Judgement.
Our view limits grace and mercy to God's sovereign will in choosing His elect (your view does not), and the Catholic view limits them to man's decisions to comply with requirements using their free wills (our view does not).
The Catholic view is not stated correctly. God's Grace is extended to all and enables all to come to the wedding feast. Some refuse to come and are left in the outer darkness. Some attend and are found to be unworthy and are ejected into the outer darkness. The rest, who comply with the Commandments of God and His teachings, will be accepted at the feast.
So, if you see limitations on God's grace and mercy as being a bad thing, then the Catholic God is in the same boat as the Reformed God.
Negative. The Reformed theology calls for limited atonement, limited mercy and limited salvation. The Catholic theology calls for this to apply to all men; the preaching of the Gospel is to convert all men to God, not merely a mechanical exercise.
Pay special attention to the fact that the first commandment is not to love men, or even to be kind to men. The first great commandment is to love God. And in loving God, we are to worship Him alone.
"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -- John 16:33"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
" For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." -- 2 Corinthians 5:21
That's the Gospel, Mark, which is to be proclaimed to all the world, every man, race and nation.
“Can you show me a Calvinistic Confession that categorically states that God elects or has elected all children who die before a certain age?”
It doesn’t.
Westminster Confession - Chapter 2: Of God, and of the Holy Trinity
2. God has all life, glory,[ goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which He has made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them. He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things; and has most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever Himself pleases In His sight all things are open and manifest, His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent, or uncertain. He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands. To Him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience He is pleased to require of them.
Westminster Confession - Chapter 3: Of God’s Eternal Decree
1. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
2. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions; yet has He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.
Westminster Confession - Chapter 5: Of Providence
1. God the great Creator of all things does uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by His most wise and holy providence, according to His infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of His own will, to the praise of the glory of His wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and mercy.
2. Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, all things come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.
If we take as a starting point that all sinned in Adam and judgment and condemnation came upon all men because of Adam’s sin and our sinning in him, then all men are under condemnation including the unborn and under-aged persons. Men are under condemnation, not because of their sins, but because of the imputed sin of their natural federal head, Adam. Now if we take into account God’s omniscience “Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions” then God knows not only what will actually come to pass (one trusts to salvation) but also, in the case of the unborn or the under-aged child, what would come to pass (that some would trust to salvation) had they been born or lived. Rev. 17:8 says that the names were written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, so God knows those that are His from the foundation of the world. That is the peace that God gave K and me when we lost our first child; God knows those that are His.
Not only that, but one might as well toss out any and all miracles. Why would God make an axe head float? Why make the Red Sea part? Why even heal the sick? The fact is our God IS a very intervening God who is directly at work in our lives to effect His plan. The fatalist or determinist is really one who believes that God is not directly involved with man.
And my only point to you was that without Calvin you would not have the political liberty that you enjoy and helped defend. You do not even acknowledge this fact and instead quote me Scriptures about apostasy.
Calvin denies our free will....and many use him to support “once saved always saved”...another lie straight from the pit.
I would be surprised to find that you had ever even read anything he wrote. I don't know what you mean when you use the expression, "our free will", since you don't define it, but Calvin did define what he meant by it.
"in speaking of the freedom of the will, Calvin distinguishes between three types of freedom, namely, freedom from necessity by compulsion, freedom from sin, and freedom from misery. On the application of this distinction to man he writes, "The first of these so inheres in man by nature that it cannot possibly be taken away, but the two others have been lost through sin." (2.2.5) The question of whether man is free from misery is a moot point, given the obvious empirical data pertaining to human suffering despite one's will to avoid pain. The question of whether humanity is free from sin finds answer in two sources, Scripture and human nature. Calvin is very careful to maintain the scriptural witness regarding the sinfulness of humanity, as well as regards the Fall as a determinative event in man's moral history. In this regard, Calvin necessarily distinguishes between necessity per se and compulsion . "The chief point of this distinction, then, must be that man, as he was corrupted by the Fall, sinned willingly, not unwillingly or by compulsion; by the most eager inclination of his heart, not by forced compulsion from without. Yet so depraved is his nature that he can be moved or impelled only to evil. But if this is true, then it is clearly expressed that man is surely subject to the necessity of sinning." (2.3.5) Quoting Augustine, Calvin affirms, "Through freedom man came to be in sin, but the corruption which followed as punishment turned freedom into necessity." (Ibid) Here then, Calvin posits that human nature necessarily sins, yet does so not by compulsion in accord with the individual's will. This view could be considered plausible and consistent if indeed the Fall precipitated the natural change in human nature which both Calvin and Augustine claim.
http://www.quodlibet.net/calfree.shtml
Which of these three types of freedom are you referring to in your use of the expression, "our free will"?
Cordially,
Actually many unChristian Christians do. In denying the universal offering of salvation to all, they deny the very words of Jesus.
But I'm always happy to see you posting from the Bible.
The verses from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (and Acts) appear to be foreign to the Calvinists, who prefer snippets mostly of Paul, but almost as frequently of the OT.
Pay special attention to the fact that the first commandment is not to love men, or even to be kind to men. The first great commandment is to love God. And in loving God, we are to worship Him alone.
Exactly. Reformed navels are never mentioned in the Bible; neither are Reformed images found in one's shaving mirrors.
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36. Exactly so, but you might want to examine the verses around it, as I have posted to you in order to understand it. This fragment of a verse does not imply agreement with Calvin or any of his minions. Scripture can be warped by taking it out of context.
"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -- John 16:33
The message for all men, yes.
" For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." -- 2 Corinthians 5:21
The message for all men, yes.
Ezekial 33:11 "As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel" Turn from your message of death, Dr. E. Turn instead to the Gospel of Life.
That's the Gospel, Mark, which is to be proclaimed to all the world, every man, race and nation.
Luke 18: 9 He then addressed this parable to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and despised everyone else. 10 "Two people went up to the temple area to pray; one was a Pharisee and the other was a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee took up his position and spoke this prayer to himself, 'O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity--greedy, dishonest, adulterous--or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week, and I pay tithes on my whole income.' 13 But the tax collector stood off at a distance and would not even raise his eyes to heaven but beat his breast and prayed, 'O God, be merciful to me a sinner.' 14 I tell you, the latter went home justified, not the former; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted."
This is the Gospel message, Dr. E. Not the Gospel of exclusivity, but the Gospel of inclusion of all men.
The more I read of Spurgeon, the less I respect him. At best, all we can actually say about the fate of babies is “We don’t know”, and , “God is just”.
There is NO unequivocal scriptural teaching either way.
Which is why it is quite understandable that people recoil at the idea of Calvinism. Calvinism, when taken at its core, is exactly the polar opposite of the idea that any man can be assured of his salvation, no matter what kind of life he leads, or what his outward spiritual life has been or what decisions he has made. In the Calvinistic world how a man lives his life is ultimately irrelevant to his standing before God. If he is elect, then he is elect and nothing he or she does in this life can change that. If a man is not elect, then nothing he or she does in this life can change that. Therefore no man can state that he is saved, nor can anyone pass judgment on whether or not some person, be they an infant or an old man, is headed for eternal reward or eternal punishment.
If you reject the formula that "all those who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," then there is no assurance of Salvation. While it is clearly an axiom that we are all at the mercy of the Lord, what promise can you point to in the Calvinist theology wherein you can be assured of your salvation? How can we be assured that we are under God's mercy if he has no conditions upon which he gives mercy?
Please read “Why I Am Not a Calvinist” by Joseph Dongell.
;-)
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
Believe in Christ, not in the Reformed doctrines of men, Dr. E.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.