ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!

[godrulz]

Appendix A Shank "Life in the Son: A study of the doctrine of perseverance." (Westcott 1960)

NT passages establishing the doctrine of conditional security vs passages cited by Chafer as misunderstood by Arminians (some verses are used by both camps):

General vs detailed verses (no time to type exact references; answering Clete's Mid-Acts question about Pauline vs others). I would look at the whole weight of Scripture in context without imposing a Mid-Acts template that excises the contextual meaning of whole, non-Pauline books. Paul was not the only one who developed soteriological understanding for the church subsequent to Acts.

Shank: (85 verses exegeted in book +; many Pauline)


Mt. 18;24;25; Lk. 8;11;12; Jn. 6;8;13;15; Acts 11;14; Rom. 8;11;14; I Cor. 9-11;15; 2 Cor. 1;11;12; Gal. 5;6; Eph. 3; Phil. 2;3; Col. 1;2; I Thess. 3; I Tim. 1;2;4-6; 2 Tim. 2;3; Heb. 2-6; 10-13; James 1;2;4;5; I Peter 1; 2 Peter 1-3; I Jn. 1;2;5; 2 John; Jude; Rev. 2;3;12;17;21;22.

Chafer (OSAS): (50 verses; uses all books vs Mid-Acts/Pauline only)

Mt. 5-7;13;18;24;25; Lk. 11; Jn. 8;13;15; Acts 5;13;14; Rom. 8;11; I Cor. 9;11;15; Gal. 5; Phil. 2; Col. 1; I Thess. 3; I Tim. 1;2;4-6; 2 Tim. 2; Heb. 3;5;6;10; James 2; 2 Peter 1-3; I Jn. 2;3;5; Jude; Rev. 2;3; 21; 22.

 

[Clete]

godrulz,

You really have to work on your sentence structure. Your posts are difficult to follow sometimes.

I'm going to leave well enough alone as far as the OSAS issue goes. The basic point is that if Paul's gospel is indeed different than the one Jesus and the twelve were preaching then that particular detail of theology is a for gone conclusion. I would rather keep my eye on the ball here and concentrate on the larger picture rather than allow the discussion to degrade into a debate over the details.

The bottom line is this. If Paul's message was unique and Acts 9 Dispensationalism is correct then the details (at least the vast majority if them) become super duper easy. You can read the Bible, take it for what it seems to be saying and understand it all without getting hopelessly confused.
On the other hand, if Paul was teaching the same gospel as the twelve then frankly God Himself only knows who is right and who isn't on pretty much any disputed detail of theology you want to bring up including the issue of why Paul was brought into the picture to begin with.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[godrulz]

The Gospel of the Kingdom preached by the 12 before the resurrection is not identical to the Gospel of Grace preached by the 12 and Paul after the resurrection (they were both Christocentric). Likewise, the Old Covenant and the New Covenant differ dispensationally. However, the Gospel from Genesis to Revelation has always been based on faith in Messiah/Christ, not works.

 

[1Way]

servent101,

Here is my reply given in our new thread.


Click here for "Is the bible finalized and exclusive to all other works?"

 

[1Way]

The context is all to clear

The context is all to clear

godrulz, 1of2

You said

Ephesians 1 is a favorite Calvinist passage.

So what? It's also a favorite non-Calvinistic passage. Truth is not a popularity contest, man's version is NOT the focus, God's word should be. Better is, Ephesians 1 is God's word. It says that

once you are saved:

• you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
  
• who is the guarantee of our inheritance
  
• until the redemption of the purchased possession,

Once we are saved, are we, or are we not His? Yes, or no? We don't get to pick and choose what sort of salvation we get. When we get saved, we become (1) a new creation, (2) we have God living in us, (3) we are thus truly a part of Him. (4) We have His mind, His righteousness accounted to our account, (5) we are bought by God with more than sufficient payment, and thus we belong to Him. And as we see from the list above, (6) we are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, (7) who is the guarantee of our inheritance which is sharing in the Son's riches in heaven as joint heirs, (8) and this sealing and guarantee is said to last until the redemption of the purchased possession!

The entire idea of eternal security is without ambiguity. If our salvation is truly conditional and we can loose it, then God does not honestly seal us through HS promise and guarantee of our inheritance lasts until redemption when we will get new bodies fit for eternity with God. Do you really want to deny all these teachings just because some circumcision writings are the ones that most clearly suggest that we have a conditional salvation?

 

[1Way]

godrulz, 2of2

Our dispensational teaching is from God thru Paul to us. For the circumcision group, in the previous and following dispensations, their teachings are from God through the circumcision writings thru Israel to the world. And all of Paul's remain faithful teachings do not violate saved by faith alone and that we can not loose our salvation. Our relationship (even gospel unto salvation requirement) is better because they had to obey the law, but we are not under the law.

Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

Before it was apart from the law, righteousness with God included obedience to the law. When Jesus said

Matthew 19:17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one [is] good but One, [that is], God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

That's right, if you will not tell us what 17b means other than what it literally says (which contextually includes vv 16, 17, 23, 24, 25), then we are happy to bring it to your attention for reasons of gospel truth awareness. Jesus was honest and true when He literally explained how to become saved in the previous dispensation (or in any dispensation for that matter!).

Israel was under the law, Jesus was born under the law,

Galatians 4:4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

and He came ministering to the nation of Israel while not doing away with the law. But after (temporarily) doing away with Israel, and starting a new dispensation, God teaches that salvation is received by faith only, and once you are saved, you get a package deal, complete with being sealed by the HS as a guarantee of our eternal inheritance until the day of redemption when we get new glorified immortal bodies.

The fact that God already gave us eternal security does not mean He controls us so that we no longer have free will! We still can and all too often sin, sometimes terribly against God and man. It's not if God controls us in a bad way or not, it's that God could offer a gift of salvation and mandate that the gift and calling is irrevocable. Who are we to dictate that once God purchased us, that we as the purchasee, not the purchaser, have the right to no longer be owned?

We are part of God the moment we become saved in this dispensation, and we have no standing to say that God can not seal us and guarantee our redemption, because He is the boss, not you, not any other manmade tradition or supposed authority. I suggest that you keep the two different groups separate, don't equate law and grace, circumcision and uncircumcision, Israel and the body of Christ.

 

[godrulz]

I reject replacement theology that blurs the distinction between Israel and the Church.

The gifts and callings of God that are irrevocable, in context, are corporate, national, or ministry gifts. It does not refer to individual salvation and the gift of eternal life (e.g. Israel was chosen to bring forth the Messiah..not everyone in national Israel was saved in the end; Rom. 9-11 is not about individual salvation).

There is a difference between isolated sin and renunciation of the faith against light to the end (apostasy).

Ephesians 1 merits a careful study beyond the scope of this thread at this time. Yes, it is the Word of God and should not be hijacked for a preconceived theology like Calvinism. The passage has been exegeted as consistent with an Open Theism or Arminian view (most reject OSAS). Calvinists and Mid-Acts interpret it as consistent with OSAS. Godly, capable people in all 3 camps translate and interpret it differently. I am confident that a biblical understanding of sealing (not 21st century North American assumptions), etc. will not have to support OSAS:help:

It is interesting that you believe OT saints and the circumcision can lose their salvation, yet those after Acts 9 can. This implies that you could make a case about how and why people in one dispensation can apostasize. Days after the supposed gospel of the uncircumcision was introduced, nothing changed in God's heart or the nature of man. If the Gospel has always been of faith from first to last (including OT according to Paul in Romans), it seems odd that one would argue that it is literally impossible for us to lose salvation (cease to believe/trust/love) just because we are in a different dispensation. The nature of God and man, the continuity of free moral agency, etc. support the theoretical possibility of forsaking a former commitment to return to the pigpen/vomit.

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by godrulz

The Gospel of the Kingdom preached by the 12 before the resurrection is not identical to the Gospel of Grace preached by the 12 and Paul after the resurrection (they were both Christocentric). Likewise, the Old Covenant and the New Covenant differ dispensationally. However, the Gospel from Genesis to Revelation has always been based on faith in Messiah/Christ, not works.

Okay this is a start.

Can you give any Biblical evidence that the change occurred at or shortly after the resurrection?

Was there something new that Jesus taught after He resurrected?
Was there something new that Peter preached at Pentecost?
Was there something new in Steven's sermons that got him killed?
Which chapter of the Bible do we have to go to in order to read about God doing anything different if not the 9th of Acts?

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[1Way]

godrulz,

I gave you God's word. And although you used some references to God's word, you did not handle God's word that I gave you at all! God is not divided and expects us to create a way to harmonize that which is biblically in contradiction. God says that He bought us, that we are not our own, we are His, we are a new creation "in Him" and that when God sees us, He sees Christ's righteousness instead!!! We are sealed for the day of redemption, we are guaranteed of our inheritance as joint heirs with Jesus! And even if we are faithless, He is faithful, He cannot deny Himself. God's word is true, when anyone in this dispensation gets saved, ALL that is what God says happens to us!

Please, explain yourself clearly if you disagree with any bible teachings that I just mentioned. They are Christianity 101 so I highly doubt that you are willing to directly deny them just because you reject once saved always saved.

Please respond to God's word that I gave you (now repeatedly). As to wondering about the meaning of sealing... The HS and sealing is for the day of redemption, which is when we get our new immortal bodies!!! The context is specific, clear and conclusive, there is no need to try to soften what a word means, the whole context is about God teaching eternal security in this dispensation.

Please don't make me re-list again every one of those bible teachings about what happens when you get saved. When you consider it all, there should be no question but that our salvation is eternally secure. If not, then we are not a new creation, we are not in Christ, we do not get sealed for the day of redemption, we have no guarantee of our inheritance, God does not see Jesus's righteousness when He looks at our account and so on.

I'm not asking you if you have other competing Christian ideas going on in your head. I'm asking you about these specific bible teachings and how you seem to be denying or even contradicting them.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Okay this is a start.

Can you give any Biblical evidence that the change occurred at or shortly after the resurrection?

Was there something new that Jesus taught after He resurrected?
Was there something new that Peter preached at Pentecost?
Was there something new in Steven's sermons that got him killed?
Which chapter of the Bible do we have to go to in order to read about God doing anything different if not the 9th of Acts?

Resting in Him,
Clete

I would have to brush up on my Acts history and examine all the above. I do not have time or interest at the moment. I will try to follow "The Plot's" evidence as an aid.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by 1Way

godrulz,

I gave you God's word. And although you used some references to God's word, you did not handle God's word that I gave you at all! God is not divided and expects us to create a way to harmonize that which is biblically in contradiction. God says that He bought us, that we are not our own, we are His, we are a new creation "in Him" and that when God sees us, He sees Christ's righteousness instead!!! We are sealed for the day of redemption, we are guaranteed of our inheritance as joint heirs with Jesus! And even if we are faithless, He is faithful, He cannot deny Himself. God's word is true, when anyone in this dispensation gets saved, ALL that is what God says happens to us!

Please, explain yourself clearly if you disagree with any bible teachings that I just mentioned. They are Christianity 101 so I highly doubt that you are willing to directly deny them just because you reject once saved always saved.

Please respond to God's word that I gave you (now repeatedly). As to wondering about the meaning of sealing... The HS and sealing is for the day of redemption, which is when we get our new immortal bodies!!! The context is specific, clear and conclusive, there is no need to try to soften what a word means, the whole context is about God teaching eternal security in this dispensation.

Please don't make me re-list again every one of those bible teachings about what happens when you get saved. When you consider it all, there should be no question but that our salvation is eternally secure. If not, then we are not a new creation, we are not in Christ, we do not get sealed for the day of redemption, we have no guarantee of our inheritance, God does not see Jesus's righteousness when He looks at our account and so on.

I'm not asking you if you have other competing Christian ideas going on in your head. I'm asking you about these specific bible teachings and how you seem to be denying or even contradicting them.

It would be laborious to exegete this passage including translation, word studies, context, historical usages, etc. It is one very long sentence in Greek. I walked through Eph. 1 25 years ago. I did not conclude Calvinism or OSAS from the passage. Lloyd-Jones wrote 1/6 volumes on chapter one alone (Calvinistic, but practical). Shank deals with the meaning of your proof text phrases in light of all the relevant verses, not a modern presupposition. I am satisfied that there is a more Arminian/Open Theism alternative understanding that is more faithful to the text.

What we are at time A does not guarantee what we are at time B.

Lighthouse says that he is a Mid-Acts person who believes in OSAS for OT/NT. I believe you would disagree. The same arguments you use to show the conditionality of salvation for the circumcision, should also be applicable/transferable to the uncircumcision in logic and principle.

I gave chapters from both categories that support conditional eternal security. They are not confined to non-Pauline teaching. Each verse should be interpreted in its own context apart from a Mid-Acts template/construct (unless Mid-Acts is definitive).

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by godrulz

I would have to brush up on my Acts history and examine all the above. I do not have time or interest at the moment. I will try to follow "The Plot's" evidence as an aid.

:up:

 

[1Way]

godrulz,
I already heard you that you doubt the scholarship offered. That was not my issue. It's God's word that needs attention and belief. Maybe, just maybe, God's word is sufficient to understand the teachings at hand. Consider

• Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also [trusted], after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed,
  (1) you were sealed with the Holy Spirit
  (2) of promise,
  14
  (3) who is the guarantee
  (4) of our inheritance
  (5) until the redemption
  (6) of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

(1) Sealed
Lets see what else God says about such a sealing.

• Quote
  Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
  End quote

Whatever this sealing is, it is to seal us for the day of redemption. It has an eye to the start of our eternal life with God.

Getting sealed is not optional, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

(2) God's promise
Sounds like God is emphasizing His will that this should be done, and that it should be done for us according to our group which is that of promise as opposed to the group which is of the law.

Getting God's promise is not optional, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

(3) guarantee or earnest money as in a down payment
God is our guarantee. God is faithful, and He is guaranteeing what happens to us in the body of Christ when we get saved. This concept is about as clear and simple and biblical as could be.

Getting God's guarantee of salvation is not optional, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

(4) Inheritance
So this sealing by God emphasizes an issue of His promise as a guarantee of our inheritance. We are joint heirs in Christ! Here is some of God's word about our inheritance.

• Quote
  Galatians 3:18 For if the inheritance [is] of the law, [it is] no longer of promise; but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
  
  Ephesians 1:11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,
  
  Colossians 3:24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance; for you serve the Lord Christ.
  
  Romans 8:17 and if children, then heirs----heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with [Him], that we may also be glorified together.
  End quote

We HAVE OBTAINED an inheritance, so eternal blessings from God is already ours! And the biggest blessing is living forever with God and His goodness.

Getting God's inheritance is not optional, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

(5) Until the day of redemption
So we are sealed by God through His promise as a guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession. Gee, I wonder if our redemption is an accurate bible teaching. (roll eyes) Kidding aside, consider.

• Quote
  Romans 8:23 Not only [that], but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.
  
  Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
  End quote

So our redemption involves getting fitted with new spiritual bodies suited for living forever with God.

Getting redeemed by God for salvation and getting new spiritual bodies is not optional, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

(6) Purchased possession
God says that everyone who gets saved in this dispensation was purchased by God, so that means we are not our own, we were bought with a price and so we do not have the standing to say that God does not own us. The standing that we do have is to frustrate God by not obeying Him.

Being God's purchased possession is not optional, Christ's sacrifice paid for our possession in full, it is part of the package God calls "the gift of salvation".

Are you so unsure about one verse and so sure about manmade scholarship that you are willing to throw out the bible's clear teachings on

• God's seal (assurance)
• indwelling HS of promise (we are a new creation in Christ)
• God's guarantee (based upon the finished work of Christ at the cross)
• of our inheritance from God and with Christ (which is basically eternal life and enjoying God's richness)
• all this in anticipation of the day of redemption (we get new bodies of incorruption fit for eternity)
• as we are God's purchased possession. God says we are already bought, we are His, our life and our righteousness is in Him.

All I did was searched the NT for other uses of these key words and God's word yielded the riches. Go to God first and foremost, we have not arrived yet, so trust God. It's not manmade scholarship first and foremost, it's God and His word first and foremost. Let God's word speak to you, let God's word increase your faith.

 

[godrulz]

I do not doubt or disagree with the package deal for all true believers. Our promises are true and great in Christ. The issue is whether a true believer can cease active faith and become an unbeliever by definition (apostasy; falling away). Then the consequences of unbelief become the new reality (loss of intended provision and promises). I affirm all the truths that apply to believers and all the consequences that apply to unbelievers. Which is applicable depends on the final state of the individual at death or Second Coming (persistent, willful state vs doubting Thomas for a time).

 

[1Way]

godrulz,

You say you agree with these teachings for someone who truly is a believer. But when do you say that these things happen to the believer?

Point is that unless these things only happen after we die and our eternal location has already been concluded, then the fact that we get all those things before we die, means that we are eternally secure NOW, not we are eternally secure once we die.

Can you imagine God teaching us something to this effect. Once you die, I will remain faithful and send those who are saved to heaven and those who are not saved to hell. What? As if without giving these assurances then maybe God would send saved people to hell and unsaved people to heaven??? Such a dislocation of timing of eternal security would make a mockery of God and our great salvation. No, the timing for when we get the package deal is in this current lifetime, and as such, means we are secure in Him according to all these consistent teachings within our current dispensation.

Our inheritance is most significantly that we will live together with God for eternity! That is the biggest and most precious part of our reward in Christ! Don't you agree that is part of our inheritance? And if we have that now, then our eternity will be with Christ because that is our inheritance!

That we are sealed for the day of redemption means an assurance from the moment of salvation till redemption day.

Oh, I forgot to mention this one before. That when God looks at us He see's Christ's righteousness instead of mine, THAT HAPPENS NOW!!!, not just at redemption or judgment day. Are you prepared to say that you can mire or diminish the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ? (Please respond)

You have to deny all these teachings as being accurate about our yet future estate (for the day of redemption, inheritance of living with God for eternity) in order to say that you can get saved and then loose God's gift of salvation.

Thanks for your time and consideration over God's word.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by 1Way




Oh, I forgot to mention this one before. That when God looks at us He see's Christ's righteousness instead of mine, THAT HAPPENS NOW!!!, not just at redemption or judgment day. Are you prepared to say that you can mire or diminish the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ? (Please respond)

You have to deny all these teachings as being accurate about our yet future estate (for the day of redemption, inheritance of living with God for eternity) in order to say that you can get saved and then loose God's gift of salvation.

Thanks for your time and consideration over God's word.

Salvation is conditional on repentant faith. The provisions and promises are for all men IF they respond to God's conviction and convincing. If they do not, this does not diminish the provisions or promises. It is provided for all, but efficacious and appropriated by those that believe. The nature of this faith is that it continues. We abide in Christ to the end. We remain in Him (see Gospels for use of these words). So, repentant faith inherently includes the idea of continuance in the faith. Why would a person who ceases to abide, remain, believe, submit, relate, love, trust, etc. still benefit from the promises? There is a conditionality to salvation that continues until death. If...then. If we come in repentant faith, we will be saved. If we continue in the faith, we will overcome and inherit eternal life. Yes, we have the assurance now (I Jn. 5:13). We are righteous now. We will be glorified if we remain in the truth. If a believer can renounce their faith and return to Judaism or Satanism (assumes free will and ability to change intentions and mind=self-evident), it would not be just or righteous for God to ignore the change (as an Open Theist you should know the future is open, not fixed unless predestined) and treat them as if they still loved Him. If someone now hates God, they will be rejected by Him in the end. This is not a deficiency in God or His promises, but the double-edged gift of genuine freedom, the nature of love relationships, and the possibility of a double-minded, wicked heart change.

"The faithfulness of God is beyond question. But the faith and faithlessness of men (the two are inseparably involved, according to the Scriptures) is quite another matter." - Shank


God's faithfulness will continue in step with man's continued faith. If man becomes faithless, God will not work with compulsion and constraint against man's will. This is not love, justice, nor relationship. There is a correspondence between man's faithfulness and continuance in the faith and God's keeping power.

In addition to the proof texts about our security in Christ, we must balanced the texts that have an element of conditionality, warnings about apostasy or falling away, etc. This does not mean salvation is of man, but it means that reconciliation involves two parties. Our choices are a factor. God's grace, will, and purposes can be resisted (regardless what evidence Calvinists ignore).

As an Open Theist, you should know in Genesis 1;2 that God created things very good. Then He was grieved that He made man and had a change in His inner disposition and intentions after the Fall (Gen. 3). He did not force Adam, Israel, or Judas to remain faithful. Repentance brought restoration. Remorse or rebellion brought judgment and eternal loss, regardless of the previous state. If creation can go from being very good to a cause worthy of being wiped out, then a new creation can also turn sour through rebellion against the light. There is consequences for this, especially if persisted in to the end. This is why Zakath is literally playing with fire.

 

[niceval4u]

contradiction

contradiction

:doh: That is one of the biggest contradictions I have ever heard. How can the lady say that God comforted her in one and in the say He gave her cancer. He would not anyone cancer or any other disease for He loves us. Of course, He can heal us, but that is done in His own good time.
Love and God bless
Val

 

[Clete]

Re: contradiction

Re: contradiction

Originally posted by niceval4u

:doh: That is one of the biggest contradictions I have ever heard. How can the lady say that God comforted her in one and in the say He gave her cancer. He would not anyone cancer or any other disease for He loves us. Of course, He can heal us, but that is done in His own good time.
Love and God bless
Val

Good Point!

The God of Calvinism is sort of like a maniac who sets your house on fire so that he can, at just the right moment, burst in and save everyone in the house and be considered a hero.

"Umm, gee, I sure wish you hadn't set my house of fire but I sure am grateful to you for having saved me from burning to death! Thanks, I guess."

That's as twisted as anything I've ever heard!


Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Emo]

Re: Re: contradiction

Re: Re: contradiction

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Good Point!

The God of Calvinism is sort of like a maniac who sets your house on fire so that he can, at just the right moment, burst in and save everyone in the house and be considered a hero.

"Umm, gee, I sure wish you hadn't set my house of fire but I sure am grateful to you for having saved me from burning to death! Thanks, I guess."


Resting in Him,
Clete

Now that's what I call funny!

:crackup:

Hey Clete, that story sounds like it might be Fire Marshall Bill.

Who is Fire Marshall Bill? – A scarred, pyromaniac/arsonist who inflicts pain and injury to himself while explaining the dangers of fires, and ends up burning down or blowing up those around him. He happens to be the local fire marshall.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Re: Re: Re: contradiction

Re: Re: Re: contradiction

Originally posted by emohaslove

Now that's what I call funny!

until you remember it's what many calvinists sincerely believe to be true.