Thread: Trying to Understand the Calvinist Way of Thinking [James]
Admin
Trying to Understand the Calvinist Way of Thinking [James]
Posted : 12 Feb, 2011 08:24 AM
The other thread is about to fall off this page and I'm not done asking questions, so I'm bringing that part of the thread here.
James, you said- "You and I can never look at anyone and know that they will never accept Christ. You are to pray for them, and present the gospel to them, and be a good example. The rest is up to God. And once again, you and I can never look at another human being, and say, "that person will never accept Jesus".
True that, in my belief, however, according to your belief/theology God has elect and non-elect and we don't have the choice to be either. God decides for us.
My question was, "So... let's say one of my family members or one of my friends or coworkers has rejected Christ up to this point and therefore is not of "the elect".
But if they are "elect" why would they reject Christ? Did God 'cause them' to reject His Son? Let me take it a bit further.... One of my coworkers is gay. He is married to a man. He has openly rejected Christ to me. I love the snot out of him and continue to pray for him [although his situation makes it difficult to know how exactly]. Is he 'elect' or 'non-elect'? If he is 'elect', to accept Christ at some future point in his life, did God cause him through no will of his own to be gay, get married to a man and reject Christ until then? If he is non-elect, same question; since he has no will of his own to decide how he will live or what his eternal destination will be, God caused him to become gay, marry a man and reject Christ? Can you say Christ did not die for him because he is not 'elect'? Do you understand where I'm trying to take this when you say we have no will of our own to decide how we will live our lives, whether in Christ or not?
In case you missed it, here are my other questions-
1 Corinthians 5:5 says- "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
If it's all about God choosing who among us will be the "elect", why on earth would a person need to be delivered unto satan so that in the day of the Lord his spirit may be saved? MAY be SAVED? He's either "elect" saved, or 'un-elect', destined for hell, according to James, so what's up with the above verse? Who does it apply to?
How about Jude 1:23? "And others save with fear, pulling [them] out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
Explain "elect", "non-elect" in the context of this verse. Sounds to me like those that Jude tells us to pull out of the fire are those destined for hell, no? But then, they would be the "non-elect" if they were destined for hell, right?
Trying to Understand the Calvinist Way of Thinking [James]
Posted : 12 Feb, 2011 06:24 PM
71 said:
James, you said- "You and I can never look at anyone and know that they will never accept Christ. You are to pray for them, and present the gospel to them, and be a good example. The rest is up to God. And once again, you and I can never look at another human being, and say, "that person will never accept Jesus".
True that, in my belief, however, according to your belief/theology God has elect and non-elect and we don't have the choice to be either. God decides for us.
James replies:
Matthew 11:27: "...no one knows the Father except the Son and any
one whom the Son CHOOSES to reveal him."
Matthew 22:14: "For many are called, but few are CHOSEN."
Matthew 24:22,24,31: And if those days had not been shortened, no
human being would be saved; but for the sake of the ELECT those days
will be shortened...For false Christs and false prophets will arise
and show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible
even the ELECT... and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet
call, and the will gather HIS ELECT from the four winds, from one end
of the earth to the other.
Luke 18:7: And will not God vindicate HIS ELECT, who cry out to him
day and night?
If you want 20 more that say the same thing, just ask.
Have you ever read Romans 9?
71 continues:
My question was, "So... let's say one of my family members or one of my friends or coworkers has rejected Christ up to this point and therefore is not of "the elect".
James replies:
YOU CAN'T KNOW THAT. My church is a small church, and we have a man that got saved when he was 62.
71 continues:
But if they are "elect" why would they reject Christ?
James replies:
Because the Holy Spirit has not made them into a new creature yet. I was convinced for years that the Bible was true, and I wanted no part of Christians, or church, etc. God is the one who saves.
71 continues:
Did God 'cause them' to reject His Son? Let me take it a bit further.... One of my coworkers is gay. He is married to a man. He has openly rejected Christ to me. I love the snot out of him and continue to pray for him [although his situation makes it difficult to know how exactly]. Is he 'elect' or 'non-elect'? If he is 'elect', to accept Christ at some future point in his life, did God cause him through no will of his own to be gay, get married to a man and reject Christ until then? If he is non-elect, same question; since he has no will of his own to decide how he will live or what his eternal destination will be, God caused him to become gay, marry a man and reject Christ? Can you say Christ did not die for him because he is not 'elect'? Do you understand where I'm trying to take this when you say we have no will of our own to decide how we will live our lives, whether in Christ or not?
James replies:
1. because of the sin of Adam and Eve, ALL MANKIND is born with a will enslaved to sin. Adam and eve were our PERFECT representatives, meaning we would have done the same thing.
2. Fallen man HAS a will, but it is a will that is enslaved to sin, and will ONLY choose to reject Jesus.
3. NO ONE has a desire to repent and trust in Jesus!
The only people who do have ALREADY been born again by the Holy Spirit.
I think you should go to www.monergism.com and read there.
Just remember, what I am saying is nothing new, it is grounded in historical, creedal, Christian faith. I can back it up with Scripture, and with quotes from Christians going back two thousand years.
In Christ,
James
In case you missed it, here are my other questions-
1 Corinthians 5:5 says- "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
If it's all about God choosing who among us will be the "elect", why on earth would a person need to be delivered unto satan so that in the day of the Lord his spirit may be saved? MAY be SAVED? He's either "elect" saved, or 'un-elect', destined for hell, according to James, so what's up with the above verse? Who does it apply to?
How about Jude 1:23? "And others save with fear, pulling [them] out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
Explain "elect", "non-elect" in the context of this verse. Sounds to me like those that Jude tells us to pull out of the fire are those destined for hell, no? But then, they would be the "non-elect" if they were destined for hell, right?
Trying to Understand the Calvinist Way of Thinking [James]
Posted : 12 Feb, 2011 09:21 PM
He has said before the ESV and NAS and �You should not use an old KJV bible for serious study�. I like James and his convictions but I don�t put much weigh in his biblical judgment for the simple fact of non cross-reference to the KJV.
Conversions?
Posted : 29 Jan, 2011 11:00 AM
Flyby said:
Why is it that most all converts cling and defend modern Bibles (albeit do use the King James too), when you had the wisdom and knowledge to know to come out of a religion probably because you study and did research and if so must have researched the histories of Bibles, manuscripts, translations and translators?
James replies:
I think you mean versions of the Bible, or Translations for the title of this thread.
The reason? Because the art and science of Translation has improved.
You should not use an old KJV bible for serious study, because you don't speak that language.
The best translation for a Modern English speaker?
ESV or English Standard Version. The ESV and the NAS have the tightest word for word translation.
I think it is ironic that some protestants demand KJV only, and it was a translation paid for by a CATHOLIC king, in response to the protestants Geneva Bible!
Which Bible did the founding fathers use?
The Geneva Bible!
Which one did Shakespeare use?
The Geneva Bible!
And now Modern American Christians hardly have even hear of it!
Here is a link:
http://www.genevabible.com/editions.php
So, to recap, why do Christians use newer translations of the Bible?
Because language changes over time, and the art and science of translation has improved. the KJV has been changed so many times it is silly. There is even a KJV dictionary, because modern English speakers don't know the definition of a lot of words in the KJV.
Which translation do I recommend?
The ESV is in my opinion the best for modern English speakers.
Trying to Understand the Calvinist Way of Thinking [James]
Posted : 13 Feb, 2011 11:55 AM
James wrote- 1. because of the sin of Adam and Eve, ALL MANKIND is born with a will enslaved to sin. Adam and eve were our PERFECT representatives, meaning we would have done the same thing.
2. Fallen man HAS a will, but it is a will that is enslaved to sin, and will ONLY choose to reject Jesus.
-----
Man has a will and therefore will choose how he will live his life. If he is enslaved to sin, it is his choice to either remain in it or seek the Lord. Your above words tell me that the sinner will choose to reject Jesus. However, if he chooses to accept Jesus and receive Salvation, it is still his choice to do so, his will to live for the Lord.
-----
James wrote- 3. NO ONE has a desire to repent and trust in Jesus!
The only people who do have ALREADY been born again by the Holy Spirit.
-----
Where on earth is that in Scripture??? Nicodemus asked the Lord how to be born again. Was Nicodemus born again when he asked this question? Did he ask it out of a desire to know? Did he trust Jesus for the answer? What of those who saw or heard of the miracles that Jesus performed and had a desire to know Him more or to follow Him? People sought Him out to know Him, to be healed by Him, to have evil spirits cast out of them. These are people that, after hearing about Jesus, had a desire to trust in Him, to repent. There were those who cried, who asked the Lord to have mercy on them. And you're going to tell me the only people who can do this are those who are already born again? That it's not for the sinner? Are you going to discount those people who sought after Jesus because they wanted to know Him? There were many during the days Jesus walked who had the desire to repent and have their sins washed and trust in Jesus. There were many who heard of the preaching and had the desire to know the Jesus that was being preached.
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls." -Acts 2:38,41
Notice the order in which Peter wrote verse 38. Repentance comes first. Your view has the gift of the Holy Spirit before repentance, because, after all, "NO ONE has a desire to repent and trust in Jesus! The only people who do have ALREADY been born again by the Holy Spirit." Why preach repentance then?
