Not really.
Is God angry with sin , and was sin the Sovereign plan of God ?
- Thread starter Leatherneck0311
- Start date
Yes really. Calvinism has changed the gospel that Jesus and the apostles taught.
I believe Calvinism still teaches that Jesus is the sinless son of God who suffered the wrath of God, died on the cross, and rose from the dead, and whoever believes will be saved. Do they not teach that?
Sure but only if you’re elected which of course is not in scripture and that is how they changed the gospel by adding qualifiers that Jesus nor the apostles taught.
Election is in the scripture.
Just a sampling:
Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.
1 Peter 1:2
And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Matthew 24:22
And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Matthew 24:31
Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
Romans 8:33
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Points
- 113
So would it be fair to say that you do not object to the manner in which Calvinists generally present the gospel to the lost when witnessing, but rather your objection is against the manner in which they teach salvation to those within their congregations?
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 4,606
- Reaction score
- 1,768
- Points
- 113
No...they don't.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Points
- 113
Sure they do. The key to what voice said is found in the Calvinist teaching that all who actually do believe will be saved, but, none will/would ever first believe without being zapped first, lol.
Correct. The gospel is not different. The difference is in how one is included in the "whosoever".
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Points
- 113
Yes, the presentation language does (or should) not discriminate, but the "limited atonement" Calvinist aspect of the gospel presentation (via literal agnosticism of who the elect might be amongst those having the gospel presented to them) is inherently slightly dissonant IMNSHO for the proclaimer. It just seems to me that those who are honest about the soteriological implications of their deterministic Calvinism might have difficulty in saying "Christ died for you" to a prospective candidate, when in actuality, per Calvinist mechanics, that may be untrue if the person they are pleading with to be saved is not among Christ's elect. At a minimum they have to use precise language (or maybe "Christ may have died for you", lol), and the whole mess leads to paralysis by analysis.
If the Calvinist believes that Christ's death was sufficient but not efficient for all, I suppose he/she would have no problem saying "Christ died for you."
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 2,407
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
"Christ died for sinners. Are you a sinner? Look to Christ for forgiveness."
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 2,407
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Hm.
Yep, we believe that...
...and that...
...and that...
...and that...
... and that.
We certainly do. Did I miss a memo?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 2,407
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
More to the point, I suppose, would you find anything objectionable about the message in this Gospel tract?
https://evangelismexplosion.org/wp-content/uploads/DYKFS_Tract_v2.pdf [PDF]
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Points
- 113
hmmm, seems like that is salving the conscience about the free offer, but I can see how a person convinced that their soteriological scheme was right would be able to say it that way.
I guess that works
. It just removes the personal appeal from the one presenting the gospel, makes it a little more formal sounding, but I can see how that view allows the transfer of gospel knowledge without violating one's conscience on the free offer.I've always liked Evangelism Explosion, all the way back to Kennedy's days. The only quibble (from the Calvinist perspective) that I find slightly perplexing is this...
In that statement of gospel appeal to an existential prospective lost person who is the "our" and "us" that is being described?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 2,407
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
"Our" or "us," like "world," is often a bit flexible in definition.
If a person feels the guilt of sin, feels the need for a saviour, and turns to Christ in faith, I'd see no proble with saying Christ paid the penalty "for our sins." By all appearances, that person is one of "us."
If another person hears that same appeal, says, "Nah, I'm fine the way I am," and walks away, while he may be in denial of his own peril, he's not one of "us."
Hence also my (all too brief) "Christ died for sinners" line. If someone regognizes himself as a sinner in need of a saviour, Christ is that saviour. If he doesn't see himself as a sinner or needing salvation, Christ isn't his saviour--not in any useful sense.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Points
- 113
Interesting take for sure, appreciate the perspective. I might circle back Jen Psaki in a bit on this.
The questioner is forgetting that God, Whose ways and thoughts are of an infinitely higher order and nature than the ways and thoughts of a corrupt and fallen man, is not a man, and neither is He corrupt.I have asked Calvinists, “Is God angry and grieved with sin?” They have answered, “Yes.” Then I’ve asked, “Was sin the secret Sovereign plan of God?” They have answered, “Yes.” Then I’ve asked, “So you’re saying that God is angry and grieved with His own secret Sovereign plan?” They don’t know how to answer that. https://biblicaltruthresources.word...uthor-of-sin-calvinism-refuted-jesse-morrell/. This verse proves Calvinism is wrong.Jas 1:13 - Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil,neither tempteth he any man:
So the question is really like asking what the color blue tastes like. It's nonsense. The anger and grief of a man comes by disappointment and a thwarting of his will and expectations by individuals and circumstances out of his control.
Projecting these passions upon the uncorruptible God changes His glory into something resembling a man, or birds, or four-footed beasts, or creeping things. It's really an insidious form of idolatry.
So, if we were all idolaters, as is Leatherneck (apparently), then the question might stump us. But, Calvinists understand that God is nothing like a man or a bird or a four-footed beast or a creeping thing, and we see the question telling us more about Leatherneck than about ourselves.
Would you like to confess your idolatry and repent, and become a Calvini...er, uh...I mean, Christian?
I don't think the Calvinists you've been talking to are a representative sample.
The scripture is clear - CHRIST DIED FOR SINNERS - 1 Tim 1:5. We may (and do) proclaim this with boldness and confidence.
Now consider the following:
John 6:37 - All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
No one comes to Christ unless the FATHER draws him (Jn 6:44) so if they have any interest whatsoever, it is because the Father is drawing them to the Son. If they come to the son, they do not have to wonder whether or not they are "Elect." All they need to do is "Make their calling and election sure (2 Pet 1:10) by "Believing on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 16:31).
It really does not get much simpler! If they are elect, they will come. If they are not elect, they will not come although your "Witness" will testify against them on the day of judgment.
Our job is not to "Get them to come." Our job is to FAITHFULLY PROCLAIM the word of God which is able to make one wise unto salvation (2 Tim 3:15) and from there, God will draw such as are "Ordained to Eternal Life" (Acts 13:48).
Where "Seeker Friendly" types often mess up is in their attempt to make the Gospel Message more palpable and appealing to the natural man. They may downplay matters of sin, repentance, and judgment and focus on John 3:16 and "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life!" John 3:16 is perhaps the most beautiful verse in the bible and through this passage, I personally came to faith personally but It had no meaning to me until I realized I was a sinner who deserved HELL!