Is anyone interested in Wed. 3/20/2024 Open Discussion?

Well, that is NOT what Reformed theology teaches.
We believe that no sinner is "forced" to sin, but rather that they sin WILLFULLY, and the unrepentant are so bad that the intentionally JUMP head-long into sin.

YOU may personally believe that sin is "not of their will", and that is a very BIZARRE (and unBiblical) position to hold, but please do not project that belief onto the Reformed. It is NOT something we believe.
I did not know this. Reformed theology gives some credence to free will. Wouldn't it follow that if people sin of their own free will, they could choose Christ of their own free will? I can't fathom free will being free if no choice is involved. I assume you meant free will because you said they "were not forced to sin." Therefore, they were free not to sin.

I overheard my eldest daughter playing with her little sister. She said, "Now, Esther, you can choose any cookie you want." There was a pause, and then she continued, "And I'll tell you which one you want." That is not free will.
 
Well, in order to have a productive discussion, we would first have to "define" what 'free will" means.

Reformed Christians believe that sinners have sinned OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. And having (freely) sinned, they have become SLAVES of their sin, although they love being enslaved in their sin:

Rom. 6:16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.
And how does one go from being "slaves of sin" to becoming "slaves of righteousness"?

"Thanks be to GOD", of course (v.17).
So then, it was not decided before the world was created, as I have heard?
Perhaps that is because we have obeyed God and "made our calling and election sure":

2Pet. 1:10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.
But would this not indicate a chance of falling away?
Well, when you come into the forum badmouthing Calvinism, and being contentious in every post, and going out of your way to find offense in posts where no offense was intended, it becomes very difficult to assume your "thinking" is so positive and irenic.



I fixed it for you.
And it seems self-evident that the vast majority of society holds no "hope of salvation", nor do they even believe they are under sin.



Well, that is NOT what Reformed theology teaches.
We believe that no sinner is "forced" to sin, but rather that they sin WILLFULLY, and the unrepentant are so bad that the intentionally JUMP head-long into sin.

YOU may personally believe that sin is "not of their will", and that is a very BIZARRE (and unBiblical) position to hold, but please do not project that belief onto the Reformed. It is NOT something we believe.



Well, in order to have a productive discussion, we would first have to "define" what 'free will" means.

Reformed Christians believe that sinners have sinned OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. And having (freely) sinned, they have become SLAVES of their sin, although they love being enslaved in their sin:

Rom. 6:16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

And how does one go from being "slaves of sin" to becoming "slaves of righteousness"?

"Thanks be to GOD", of course (v.17).



It's almost like you're quoting Scripture:

John 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.



God gives His elect a new heart of flesh, that causes us to hate our sin and love God, so there is nobody who is drawn "kicking and screaming" and not wanting to be saved, if that's what you're suggesting:

Ezek. 11:19 And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, 20 that they may walk in my statutes and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God.



All glory be to God!

Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.
Rev. 13:8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.



So says the Bible:

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.



Perhaps that is because we have obeyed God and "made our calling and election sure":

2Pet. 1:10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.



It does.
Thanks for noticing!



Well, I don't know of any Reformed believer who "frets" over doctrine. But your claim seems more than a bit disingenuous. You are claiming we shouldn't discuss theology, but if we don't answer your questions, then we're wrong for doing that also. It's like you're going out of your way to try to look for an excuse to criticize us. Please tell me that's not your intent.

But we are also told to "contend for the faith" (maybe you are unfamiliar with that verse?):

Jude 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

We also love the gospel, and want everyone to hear it, to the glory of God. And we wish to correct people when they misinterpret the gospel.

But I think you will notice that if we believe it's pointless to continue arguing with someone, since they're not interested in learning, but only in being contentious, that we find it easier to "disengage" (which is when people complain that we "won't answer their questions").

And yes, there is no chance that any of God's elect will be lost:

John 10:28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.
2Pet. 3:8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 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.



We seem to be, yes.
I would agree.
Okay, so this sheds a little more light on your beliefs. I am not sure about a couple of points. The free-will thing still seems a little wobbly to me. Even though it has been difficult discussing this with you, I appreciate that you are willing to answer my questions and explain things.

If you believe these things, don't fret about what other people say. Just be joyful about what God thinks about it; he is the only one who matters.
 
That is an interesting question. I have thought about my kids. When I first saw them, they got everything I could do for their well-being. The issue of deserving never entered my mind. I have often felt that God feels this way about his creatures. Even we mortals have strong opinions on this. When I see an abused child, I say, "They did not deserve to be treated this way."

With all due respect, it seems to me that a great deal of heresy is created by following one's emotions and feelings, rather than by following Scripture.

We are not God's "children".
We are God's "creatures".
It would be like a potter creating a clay pot, and pretending the clay pot is their "child". It is not. It is a creation, not a son.

And yes, we have it "hard-wired" in us to take care of all children (and adults too, that's why we are to love our enemies), because all other humans are God's creations, and we are stewards of God's creations to care for them, just as we would be stewards and care for our neighbour's house if they were on vacation.

But not all humans are God's children.
Those who are ADOPTED into the family of God (Rom. 8:15, Gal. 4:5, Eph. 1:5) are children of God, but others are not.

Here is another passage you need to address:

Rom. 9:20 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?” 21 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? 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 the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

I think God knows even better than we do if one has no say in the matter but is born with a sinful nature that grasps them uncontrollably and dictates their eternal future, then punishing them for eternity over something they had no control or choice in would be unfair.

Why do you erroneously think that sinners don't "choose" to sin?
Do you actually think it's "forced" upon them?!

There is something in us all that understands this.

So (according to you) let's just throw out the Bible, and instead invent our own theology out of our own imaginations?

Wouldn't we all react negatively to a parent threatening and punishing a child for wetting the bed?

The God-sinner relationship is NOT "parent-child" relationship.
It is a "Creator-sinner" relationship.

Now, one could understand meeting out punishment for a rebellious child who wet the bed to express a temper tantrum, but punishing a child for something they have no control over would roil all of us.

Again, you are operating under the erroneous and bizarre notion that God "forces" people to sin. He doesn't.
We sin willingly and eagerly.

But God made us alive in Christ.

What do you mean by "God made us alive in Christ"?
Are you under the misimpression that God made EVERYONE "alive in Christ"?! Where does the Bible teach that?!
 
I did not know this. Reformed theology gives some credence to free will. Wouldn't it follow that if people sin of their own free will, they could choose Christ of their own free will?

Of course not.
How can you "choose" Christ when you are "dead in trespasses and sins"?

And what do you do with John 6:44?

John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

"No one can come to me" denotes INABILITY.
Those whom the Father does not draw CANNOT "choose Christ".

I can't fathom free will being free if no choice is involved. I assume you meant free will because you said they "were not forced to sin." Therefore, they were free not to sin.

I agree (and I think most Reformed do as well) with Augustine:

Pre-fall Manable to sin;
able to not sin;
Post-fall Manable to sin;
unable to not sin;
Reborn Man;able to sin;
able to not sin;
Glorified Manunable to sin;
able to not sin;

I overheard my eldest daughter playing with her little sister. She said, "Now, Esther, you can choose any cookie you want." There was a pause, and then she continued, "And I'll tell you which one you want." That is not free will.

You prove my point.

We get our theology from God's word, the Bible.
You get your theology from your imagination and your daughters.
 
So then, it was not decided before the world was created, as I have heard?

Of course it was decided before the world was created.
That's when God chose His elect.
That's when He wrote their names in the Lamb's book of Life.

But would this not indicate a chance of falling away?

Of course not.
Why would it?

Okay, so this sheds a little more light on your beliefs. I am not sure about a couple of points. The free-will thing still seems a little wobbly to me.

Okay... So where does the Bible teach, "We are free to choose whether or not to accept Christ"? Chapter and verse, please...

John 6:44 denotes our inability.
Rom. 8:7-8 denotes our inability.
1Cor. 2:14 denotes our inability.
"Dead in sin" (Eph. 2:1, Col. 2:13) denotes our inability.
"slaves to sin" (John 8:34, Rom. 6:16-18) denotes our inability.

John 1:12-13 indicates it is not of our will.
Rom. 9:11-13 indicates that it is not of our will.

And aside from referring to voluntary sacrifices over and above what the law requires, there is no verse that describes man has allegedly having "free will".

Even though it has been difficult discussing this with you, I appreciate that you are willing to answer my questions and explain things.

Thank you.

If you believe these things, don't fret about what other people say.

I have never "fretted".
Did that come from your "word-of-the-day" toilet paper?

Just be joyful about what God thinks about it; he is the only one who matters.

Amen!
But I refuse to disobey the Bible:

Jude 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
 
Why do you erroneously think that sinners don't "choose" to sin?
Do you actually think it's "forced" upon them?!
Personally, I don’t but some people do. I am glad that you don’t. I’m glad that you can see that those that perish will do so by their own choice and not by God’s choices.
 
With all due respect, it seems to me that a great deal of heresy is created by following one's emotions and feelings, rather than by following Scripture.

We are not God's "children".
We are God's "creatures".
It would be like a potter creating a clay pot, and pretending the clay pot is their "child". It is not. It is a creation, not a son.

And yes, we have it "hard-wired" in us to take care of all children (and adults too, that's why we are to love our enemies), because all other humans are God's creations, and we are stewards of God's creations to care for them, just as we would be stewards and care for our neighbour's house if they were on vacation.

But not all humans are God's children.
Those who are ADOPTED into the family of God (Rom. 8:15, Gal. 4:5, Eph. 1:5) are children of God, but others are not.

Here is another passage you need to address:

Rom. 9:20 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?” 21 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? 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 the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?



Why do you erroneously think that sinners don't "choose" to sin?
Do you actually think it's "forced" upon them?!



So (according to you) let's just throw out the Bible, and instead invent our own theology out of our own imaginations?



The God-sinner relationship is NOT "parent-child" relationship.
It is a "Creator-sinner" relationship.



Again, you are operating under the erroneous and bizarre notion that God "forces" people to sin. He doesn't.
We sin willingly and eagerly.



What do you mean by "God made us alive in Christ"?
Are you under the misimpression that God made EVERYONE "alive in Christ"?! Where does the Bible teach that?!
“…even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
 
Of course it was decided before the world was created.
That's when God chose His elect.
That's when He wrote their names in the Lamb's book of Life.



Of course not.
Why would it?



Okay... So where does the Bible teach, "We are free to choose whether or not to accept Christ"? Chapter and verse, please...

John 6:44 denotes our inability.
Rom. 8:7-8 denotes our inability.
1Cor. 2:14 denotes our inability.
"Dead in sin" (Eph. 2:1, Col. 2:13) denotes our inability.
"slaves to sin" (John 8:34, Rom. 6:16-18) denotes our inability.

John 1:12-13 indicates it is not of our will.
Rom. 9:11-13 indicates that it is not of our will.

And aside from referring to voluntary sacrifices over and above what the law requires, there is no verse that describes man has allegedly having "free will".



Thank you.



I have never "fretted".
Did that come from your "word-of-the-day" toilet paper?



Amen!
But I refuse to disobey the Bible:

Jude 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
That is good, it will lead to a softer gentler soul.
 
Personally, I don’t but some people do.

I believe you are mistaken about that.
Please provide a quote from any believer who explicitly teaches that they think, "God forces them to sin against their will".

I am glad that you don’t. I’m glad that you can see that those that perish will do so by their own choice and not by God’s choices.

They are not mutually exclusive:

Gen. 50:20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.

Your assertion is also proved false by Isa. 10:5-7 and Acts 4:27-28.
 
“…even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

And who was 1 Corinthians written to?

If you read a love letter that a soldier wrote to his wife during WW II, and in the letter he says, "I love you, dear", do you suppose that it means he loves YOU, simply because you read the letter?
 
That is an interesting question. I have thought about my kids. When I first saw them, they got everything I could do for their well-being. The issue of deserving never entered my mind. I have often felt that God feels this way about his creatures. Even we mortals have strong opinions on this. When I see an abused child, I say, "They did not deserve to be treated this way."

I think God knows even better than we do if one has no say in the matter but is born with a sinful nature that grasps them uncontrollably and dictates their eternal future, then punishing them for eternity over something they had no control or choice in would be unfair. There is something in us all that understands this.

Wouldn't we all react negatively to a parent threatening and punishing a child for wetting the bed? Now, one could understand meeting out punishment for a rebellious child who wet the bed to express a temper tantrum, but punishing a child for something they have no control over would roil all of us.

We were all born with a sinful nature; none of us chose, and that sinful nature was bound to produce sin in us. Only the interference of God could change that. It is not so much a punishment, for we were already dead in our sinful nature. There was not a point where we became lost. That is what we were born as when we came into this world. But God made us alive in Christ. The only punishment that is deserved is for willful rebellion against God if we go on willfully practicing sin.

That is how I currently understand it.
Here is the thing, all of His creation is His, but only the saved are His children. We view children way differently than God does. Proof? You got it.

And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”[1 Samuel 15:1-3]

Then in Joshua 6, only Rahab and her immediately family were spared from destruction. Same with Ai, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron, Debir, et al. So God does not see babies, infants, toddlers, as innocent in His sight.
 
I did not know this. Reformed theology gives some credence to free will. Wouldn't it follow that if people sin of their own free will, they could choose Christ of their own free will? I can't fathom free will being free if no choice is involved. I assume you meant free will because you said they "were not forced to sin." Therefore, they were free not to sin.

I overheard my eldest daughter playing with her little sister. She said, "Now, Esther, you can choose any cookie you want." There was a pause, and then she continued, "And I'll tell you which one you want." That is not free will.
Reformed theology does not teach free will but a will that freely chooses within the confines of that person's nature. Just like a prisoner inside a 9' x 12' jail cell. That person can freely move in the confines of that cell, but cannot of their own choosing, get beyond the confines of those prison bars. A person is either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness, which is exactly what Paul taught in Romans 6:16ff.
 
That is an interesting question. I have thought about my kids. When I first saw them, they got everything I could do for their well-being. The issue of deserving never entered my mind. I have often felt that God feels this way about his creatures. Even we mortals have strong opinions on this. When I see an abused child, I say, "They did not deserve to be treated this way."

I think God knows even better than we do if one has no say in the matter but is born with a sinful nature that grasps them uncontrollably and dictates their eternal future, then punishing them for eternity over something they had no control or choice in would be unfair. There is something in us all that understands this.

Wouldn't we all react negatively to a parent threatening and punishing a child for wetting the bed? Now, one could understand meeting out punishment for a rebellious child who wet the bed to express a temper tantrum, but punishing a child for something they have no control over would roil all of us.

We were all born with a sinful nature; none of us chose, and that sinful nature was bound to produce sin in us. Only the interference of God could change that. It is not so much a punishment, for we were already dead in our sinful nature. There was not a point where we became lost. That is what we were born as when we came into this world. But God made us alive in Christ. The only punishment that is deserved is for willful rebellion against God if we go on willfully practicing sin.

That is how I currently understand it.
Ppl have the wrong view of election and predestination. They think that if God purposefully leaves some to their justly condemned state while saving others, He is being unfair, unloving. That cannot be further from the truth. The question that should be asked is not "Why does God only save some?" but "Why does God save any?" If God is truly being "fair", then all would die lost.
 
Reformed theology does not teach free will but a will that freely chooses within the confines of that person's nature. Just like a prisoner inside a 9' x 12' jail cell. That person can freely move in the confines of that cell, but cannot of their own choosing, get beyond the confines of those prison bars. A person is either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness, which is exactly what Paul taught in Romans 6:16ff.
Paul did teach this exactly. What Paul and Jesus didn't teach however is that men weren't free to believe the gospel. The denial of ability to believe the gospel is not anything taught by the apostles or by Jesus. Although they account for it, they never take that choice away from men. Even the worst of sinners can accept the gospel, provided only they hear it. Why some hear and do not believe is because they would rather believe a lie as to their own infallibility 2 Thess 2:11 in pursuit of their love of sinning. That is they make a conscious choice to credit falsehood. So there is a distinction to be made between compulsion to sin, and the love of sinning.

And what Calvin (or rather Augustine because Calvin is just a latter day disciple of Augustine) fail to do, which Jesus does do, to is to disguish different kinds of sinner and impute ultimate responsibility to the sinner, or if they do, they pay lip service to it. Augustine was amongst the worst offenders when it came to sin, and I do not credit his "lump all sinners into the same category and impute God's choice as ultimately responsible for salvation/damnation." Jesus says, a man is responsible for his own damnation, and not God. I'm not even sure if Augustine ever truly repented.
 
Paul did teach this exactly. What Paul and Jesus didn't teach however is that men weren't free to believe the gospel. The denial of ability to believe the gospel is not anything taught by the apostles or by Jesus. Although they account for it, they never take that choice away from men. Even the worst of sinners can accept the gospel, provided only they hear it. Why some hear and do not believe is because they would rather believe a lie as to their own infallibility 2 Thess 2:11 in pursuit of their love of sinning. That is they make a conscious choice to credit falsehood. So there is a distinction to be made between compulsion to sin, and the love of sinning.

And what Calvin (or rather Augustine because Calvin is just a latter day disciple of Augustine) fail to do, which Jesus does do, to is to disguish different kinds of sinner and impute ultimate responsibility to the sinner, or if they do, they pay lip service to it. Augustine was amongst the worst offenders when it came to sin, and I do not credit his "lump all sinners into the same category and impute God's choice as ultimately responsible for salvation/damnation." Jesus says, a man is responsible for his own damnation, and not God. I'm not even sure if Augustine ever truly repented.
Well, Jesus did tell those Pharisees this, "but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep."[John 10:26] Man, in his fallen state, cannot believe, and will not believe.
 
Actually this is a distraction from Paul's teaching that Jesus is the savior of all men, and especially those who believe. This assigns the choice not to be saved to the sinner, and replaces the question "why does God only save some?" with "why do only some choose salvation?" (which appears to be anathema to the student of Calvin and Augustine).
If Jesus is the Savior of all men, and not all men are saved, then how can He be (rightly) called the Savior of all men?
 
Back
Top