In the end analysis, the Grace believer and the Calvinist end up in the Heavenly Kingdom of God, however, they differ on HOW we end up in Heaven. The Calvinist believe they've been chosen (The Elect) before the foundation of the world, by God's sovereign will. Whereas, the 'Grace believer' believes that one must HEAR the Gospel of the grace of God and place one's faith in Christ as their Savior.
Omniscience means fatalism.
- Thread starter Stripe
- Start date
In the end analysis, the Grace believer and the Calvinist end up in the Heavenly Kingdom of God, however, they differ on HOW we end up in Heaven. The Calvinist believe they've been chosen (The Elect) before the foundation of the world, by God's sovereign will. Whereas, the 'Grace believer' believes that one must HEAR the Gospel of the grace of God and place one's faith in Christ as their Savior.
Leaving off a difference on how you portray the Calvinist, because it's a bit more complicated, why do you hear the gospel and respond to it and another man not? This is the question the Calvinist asks that is difficult to answer without making it about dumb luck or personal advantage, a thing to boast about, being smarter or paying more attention, etc.
Think of it like this for a moment....you and a friend named Al are passing through a park, having a pleasant conversation. A man in the park proclaims the good news to everyone who passes by. The two of you slow, take it all in. You find yourself stepping forward to respond, and in short order have begun your walk as a new Christian. Al thinks you've lost your mind and walks away, saddened by the loss of his friend to a delusion.
Why the two responses? What put you on the right path and Al on the path to perdition? You made a different decision when met with the same call and proffer. Is the answer dumb luck or something else? What is that something else?
Rosenritter
New member
The Calvinist answer seems to be "dumb luck" to have been lucky enough to have been given the ability to believe, and not just that, they are forced to believe of their own free will. Everyone else is free to choose to believe, except that they are specifically denied the ability to choose the only thing that might matter. That's the essence of what I've seen here.
No, that's not really what a Calvinist would say. He'd say that God is the moving party in this, but how would you respond to my questions on the point of that representative hypothetical set out in your quote of me?
Rosenritter
New member
From the Calvinist base, wouldn't it would be dumb luck on behalf of the created creature, of salvation being forced upon it with having any practical option to exercise a contrary choice? Luck would be the outside factor, not a choice of the creature.
If you are asking what my answer would be, it would be what each creature (you or Al or whomever) chose to believe. There may be other factors affecting this, such as "does this belief seem plausible or is it self-contradictory?" or "do I refuse to consider such a possibility because I am my own god?" or even "I am so distracted by depression right now that I cannot think straight?" The heart is a complex item, and affected by a multitude of factors. That's a discussion unto itself that isn't done justice by a short answer.
The Calvinist interprets Scripture one way (Via, John Calvin, Augustine of Hippo, etc.) and the 'Gospel of the grace of God' believers that the Apostle Paul taught/preached, interpret it from the Apostle Paul's perspective. That being: Salvation by one's faith (without works) in Christ as their Savior.
There's a HUGE divide/difference between the two.
There's a HUGE divide/difference between the two.
So you're suggesting a superior clarity of thought on the part of the person who accepts and asks for grace, either in the moment or in every moment? Or superior humility? Or both working together in a person to give them the clarity to accept what the other fellow rejects?
To help that along, let's say Al never does repent and receive, continuing on in his way as you continue in your walk.
Is grace, your salvation, a byproduct of that superior clarity or humility or combination of both and/or any number of superior secondary somethings that individually or collectively permit you to see and make the superior choice?
If so to what do you ascribe the root of that clarity? Were you born with it? Did you develop it? Was Al just unlucky in that regard?
Rosenritter
New member
Under perfect conditions there are no other factors to consider, and it is a matter simply of the heart. I think much of it comes down to "we believe what we want to believe" and there are various reasons why someone wants to believe in one thing or not in another. Some people really don't want to believe in a loving God.
I had a pastor once tell me that he chose to believe the dead were tortured without rest ... not for any scriptural reason (he had lost that battle already) but because he would need that to keep him loyal for eternity. As shocking as that answer was, he clarified that "people believe what we want to believe ..." and to preempt the previously-established scripture he clarified pointing to himself, "I mean me." As shocking as that answer was (who honestly admits that) I've come to think there's a certain truth to that. For good or for ill, we often reject what we don't want to believe.
There's a scripture on this regard as well:
2Th 2:10-12 KJV
(10) And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
(11) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
(12) That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
When someone does not have a love of the truth, if they resist the truth because they do not want to believe it, God has no problem with sending them deeper into delusion. As such I recognize that it is very dangerous to turn away truth, or to be stubborn in ones own mind beyond where scripture has justified. If you love not the truth in one part, perhaps anything or everything you believe might also be infected with delusion.
As for clarity? Let's go back to the love of the truth. If someone does love truth, either for the sake of truth or because of a love of that which is true (and because it is God's truth is also wonderful and perfect) then I believe that God helps us make up the difference. He can grant clarity, and his Spirit can work with our spirit.
I admit that additional external factors might make one resistant to the truth. If someone is presented truth mixed with lies, is he to be faulted for determining the entire pack as suspect when the errors are amazingly obvious? When there are a dozen different street corner preachers each with their different version and wanting their different devoted following, is he supposed to switch his mind at each and every turn? Bad example and bad doctrine has poisoned the ground in which we need to plant the gospel. I don't think this is something that God never recognized as a danger and I think he's planned for this; but in the meantime we are to obey his command to preach the gospel as we can in spite of adverse factors.
Grace is not a byproduct of anything, it is the gift of God. Is accepting that grace a better choice? In your example, I thought it was, but beyond that, somehow I understood that it was a real choice and not another sales pitch for an imaginary fairy tale.
Was Al unlucky? I don't know Al's heart. He might appear very similar on the surface but have entirely different motivations deep inside. Or perhaps he's heard the same message too many times before and when he's tested them they were shown to be unprepared, false, or contradictory. But also in your example, if I was reached and Al was not, and I truly believe this gospel, Al is no longer alone in this and now has someone that he knows that will be looking for how to reach out to him also.
Calvinists also believe that one must hear the gospel of the grace of God and place one's faith in Christ as their Savior. I don't know a single person who calls themselves a Calvinist that would say otherwise. They just believe that people have either been predestined to do so or not. It isn't the gospel that's different so much as it is the mechanism that causes one to believe or reject it. The point being that just because they wrongly believe that God predestined them to believe the gospel doesn't mean that they don't believe the gospel.
I doubt that you'll find much basis to legitimately disqualify Calvinists from salvation on the basis of the gospel itself. Typically, where a Calvinist's salvation comes into question is when they are willing to openly blaspheme God; when their minds are so clouded by the doctrines surrounding predestination and sovereignty that they sacrifice God's character in favor of their doctrine. It is then that it becomes legitimate to ask whether the person has actually accepted the gospel and is worshiping the right God and putting their faith in the right Jesus or are they instead putting faith in their doctrine and worshiping a god that does not exist. A major red flag that indicates that you may be dealing with such a person is their willingness and even instistence upon the redefinition of words like "love" and "righteousness" and "justice". If a Calvinist is shown how their doctrine contradicts the idea that God is just and their response is to redefine the word "justice" (or to render the word meaningless) rather than to adjust their doctrine, that person is on dangerous ground. If you can redefine basic concepts to suit your desired doctrine then where's the line to be drawn? How far down that road is it permissable to go?
Clete
Did I say a Calvinist CANNOT be saved? I think you're jumping to conclusions. :nono:
Old GM is retiring from this thread. Like I said in the other thread I retired from: Calvinists have the right to be wrong. I'll check this thread out once in a while, however, I won't be participating. :wave:
When you stated...
"The Calvinist believe they've been chosen (The Elect) before the foundation of the world, by God's sovereign will. Whereas, the 'Grace believer' believes that one must HEAR the Gospel of the grace of God and place one's faith in Christ as their Savior.",
...you seemed to be drawing a distinction that implied that the Calvinist does not believe 'that one must hear the Gospel of the grace of God and place one's faith in Christ as their Savior'.
Was that not your intention?
Also, don't read any hostility into my side of the conversation. I think that you and I are probably 99.99% in agreement. I'm just in the iron sharpens iron mode here.
What, in your view, is the gospel according to Calvinism?
genuineoriginal
New member
If a Calvinist believes that they have been chosen before the foundation of the world to hear the Gospel and place their faith in Christ as their Savior, why wouldn't they be saved like everyone else that has heard the Gospel and placed their faith in Christ as their Savior?
The only difference seems to be the belief that the Calvinist couldn't have done this without "Irresistible Grace".
Well, that's not the only difference but basically, yes, that's the exact point I was making. It's not the gospel that Calvinists get wrong. It's when you start talking about how and/or why one person believes and another doesn't where they go off the deep end.
glorydaz
Well-known member
My impression has been that the Calvinists only "hear" the Gospel because they are elect. They are saved and then they "hear". They were chosen to hear and the rest were not. I think that's what GM is talking about.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Actually it is only those elected unto salvation (to be saved at an appointed time). The elect are first quickened by God the Holy Spirit, such that they have ears to hear, and will then trust, assent, and know—the elements of true faith—the Gospel.
Accordingly, God acts first (monergism). Afterwards the elect believe what they hear. God is not doing the believing for them, hence, following re-birth (quickening, born again, regeneration) it is synergistic.
AMR
glorydaz
Well-known member
Exactly. But the point is that they do believe. Their convoluted stupidity about predestination and regeneration doesn't change the fact that they do, in fact, believe the gospel.
It is when a Calvinist says something like this...
"The elect are first quickened by God the Holy Spirit, such that they have ears to hear, and will then trust, assent, and know—the elements of true faith—the Gospel." - AMR post 578
...that I get nervous about whether they've believed the gospel or not. AMR says here that "the gospel" and "the elements of true faith" are the same thing. Someone should ask him what exactly is he referring too when he says "the elements of true faith". If he bothers to give a straight answer, then nearly anyone could make a judgment about whether he is or is not saved.
Clete