New Calvinist Bible

[Messy]

New Calvinist Bible

Romans 8:28-30 And we know that for those who lovethe specific individuals who have been elected by God all things work together for good, for those specific individuals who are called according to his purpose. For those specific individuals whom he foreknewunconditionally elected he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many specific individual brothers. And those specific individuals whom he predestined he also called, and those specific individuals whom he called he also justified, and those specific individuals whom he justified he also glorified.

Romans 10:9-21 if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be savedthis is evidence that you were arbitrarily and individually chosen for salvation. For with the heart an elect one believes and is justified, and with the mouth an elect one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Every elect one whowill believes in him and will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on himthe elect. For “every elect one whowill calls on the name of the Lord and will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good newsDon’t worry – if they are elect they will definitely be saved anyway and if they are not elect there is nothing anyone can do about it.” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearingprior and unconditional election of specific individuals and hearingthat election through the word of Christarbitrary decision of God. But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.” But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says, “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry.” Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my handsfolded my arms to a non-elect, disobedient and contrary people.”

Romans 11:7-11, 23-24 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect (i.e. the individuals who have always been elect from eternity) obtained it, but the rest (i.e. the individuals who have always been non-elect from eternity) were hardened, as it is written, “God gave them (i.e. the non-elect from eternity) a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” And David says, “Let their (i.e. the non-elect from eternity) table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them; let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever.” So I ask, did they (i.e. the non-elect from eternity) stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Of course! They are non-elect from eternity and have been hardened, and no one can ever change from being non-elect to being elect. … And even they (i.e. the non-elect from eternity), if they do not will continue in their unbelief as they are non-elect from eternity and there is no way that someone who is non-elect can become elect, they will not be grafted in, for God has the power is not going to graft them in again. For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, not be grafted back into their own olive tree, because they are non-elect from eternity and there is no way that someone who is non-elect can become elect.

Romans 8 – The Predestination Station

Posts about Romans 8 written by kingswoodhart

predestinationstation.wordpress.com

 

[Messy]

 

[atpollard]

Would you be willing to insert the opposite of TULIP into those verses and accept the anti-Calvinist Bible?

• Instead of “depraved”, insert “good” (Men don’t actually NEED a savior because they have the power to save themselves - Pelagianism)
• Instead of “unconditional”, insert “conditional” (God chose you because YOU DESERVED IT).
• Instead of “died to save”, insert “died to purchase a chance to save themself” (Ineffectual Atonement requires HUMAN activation to be effective).
• Instead of “irresistible”, insert “resistible” (God can do NOTHING without the permission of MEN).
• Instead of “saved”, insert “momentarily on the path to heaven, but only one sin away from returning to damnation”.

The “Free Will” Bible is a much scarier thing than the Doctrines of Grace and the Sovereign God that “has mercy on whom He has mercy”.

 

[Josiah]

I'm a 1 whole and who half point TULIPian....

The Deprived is absolutely point on.
The predestination point is half right.
The preservation point is half right.

But I agree, @atpollard, TULIP is a whale of a lot better than the "free will" evangelical opposites.


The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of TULIP

This was "borrowed" from a blog. It seems good and I basically agree with the Lutheran understandings here.


TULIP: A Response from Calvinism, Lutheranism and Arminianism

Calvinism has summarized its position in the famous acronym TULIP, and this serves as a useful way to approach the issue (being logical Calvinism is, if nothing else, easy to follow):


T: "total depravity"
Calvinism: Man after the Fall has no ability to cooperate with God's grace in conversion
Arminianism: Man after the Fall can cooperate with Gods grace in conversion
Lutheranism: Agrees with Calvinism on total depravity
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 3:9-20; Gal. 3:22
Josiah: Yup.

U: "unconditional election"
Calvinism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation and the others (reprobates) for damnation.
Arminianism: Before the world was created, God foresaw those who would choose Him of their own free will and elected them to salvation
Lutheranism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation but did not reprobate (chose for damnation) any.
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 9:11-13; 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; Mat. 25:34, 41.
Josiah: This is half right. I agree with predestination to heaven but not to hell.


L: "limited atonement"
Calvinism: Jesus only died for the elect, objectively atoning for their sin, but he did not die for the sins of the reprobates.
Arminianism: Christ died to give all the possibility to be saved.
Lutheranism: Christs death objectively atoned for all the sin of the world; by believing we receive this objective atonement and its benefits.
Relevant Bible passages: John 1:29; 1 John 2:2; 2 Cor. 5:14-15, 19.
Josiah: No! What a horrible, terrible invention! And the opposite of what the Bible states and the church has believed.


I: "irresistable grace"
Calvinism: In all of God's outward actions (preaching, baptism, etc.) there is an outward call which all receive, yet there is also a secret effectual calling which God gives to the elect alone. This effectual calling alone saves and is irresistable.
Arminianism: God gives in His outward actions the same grace to all; this grace can be resisted by all.
Lutheranism: The question is not answerable; for the elect, grace will irresistably triumph, yet those who reject Christ have rejected that Grace; yet the grace is the same.
Relevant Bible passages: Eph. 2:1-10; Acts 13:48; James 1:13-15
Josiah: Nope.


P: "perseverance of the saints" ("once saved, always saved.")
Calvinism: Salvation cannot be lost.
Arminianism: Salvation can be lost through unrepentant sin and unbelief.
Lutheranism: Salvation can be lost through unbelief, but this legal warning does not cancel the Gospel promise of election
Relevant Bible passages: 1 Cor. 10:12. 2 Peter 2:1, 20-22.
Josiah: This is a Law/Gospel issue; the Bible teaches both "sides" but the key is the application. It also places all on the "genuiness" of faith rather than on the object of faith.




.

 

[Messy]

-

 

[atpollard]

John 6:44

• No one can come to Me [Total Inability of man to choose Christ]
• unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Election of God to 'show mercy on whom He will show mercy']
• draws him; [Irresistible Grace of God effectually draws man to salvation in the Son]
• and I will raise him up at the last day. [Preservation of Saints, by God, from Predestination through Glorification.]

so then …

• John said “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent Me draws them.”
• Calvinism says “No one can go to Jesus unless God the Father draws them.”

• John says “I will raise you up at the last day”
• Calvinism says “Jesus will raise you up at the last day.”

I see no conflict between what the Bible says and what Calvinists claim the Bible says.

• [ T ] Can anyone go to the Son without being drawn by the Father?
• [ U ] Are those drawn by the Father drawn because of their will or the Father’s will?
• [ L ] Are those not drawn by the Father accepted (raised) by the Son?
• [ I ] Do some drawn by the Father resist the power of God?
• [ P ] Does Jesus raise all who the Father drew to Him or not?

 

[atpollard]

They're both wrong. The Jewish guy says you shouldn't cherry pick. Every doctrin just takes a bunch of texts and disregards others or just give em another meaning.

I’ll take your word for it. The internet has too many videos by “experts” wanting to explain what the Bible REALLY means for me to waste time watching every posted video. I tend to almost never watch posted videos unless I recognize the people in the video (like excerpts from some famous theologians debating).

I would suggest that criteria applies to “the Jewish guy” and his position as much as it applies to the position of anyone else. I have posted John 6:44 … what have I misunderstood in what John said and what did John REALLY MEAN in John 6:44?

 

[Messy]

John 6:44

• No one can come to Me [Total Inability of man to choose Christ]
• unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Election of God to 'show mercy on whom He will show mercy']
• draws him; [Irresistible Grace of God effectually draws man to salvation in the Son]
• and I will raise him up at the last day. [Preservation of Saints, by God, from Predestination through Glorification.]

so then …

• John said “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent Me draws them.”
• Calvinism says “No one can go to Jesus unless God the Father draws them.”

• John says “I will raise you up at the last day”
• Calvinism says “Jesus will raise you up at the last day.”

I see no conflict between what the Bible says and what Calvinists claim the Bible says.

• [ T ] Can anyone go to the Son without being drawn by the Father?
• [ U ] Are those drawn by the Father drawn because of their will or the Father’s will?
• [ L ] Are those not drawn by the Father accepted (raised) by the Son?
• [ I ] Do some drawn by the Father resist the power of God?
• [ P ] Does Jesus raise all who the Father drew to Him or not?

I : maybe the false teachers and the ones who didn't stay with them and were not from them, who are not saved or elected, but were bought by Him. There are those who believe for a while and then money etc chokes the Word.

L No but still He died for everyone.

With the rest I agree. They explain the potter wrong though, well, that guy does who posts here, who sounds calvinist, but even more extreme. The pot rebelled and that's why God gave it another purpose. God can't create someone hard and evil, because He is good and predestination is fine, if it's based on God knowing people's hearts. If they don't add that, it sounds like God random rejects and picks people and if you want to pray for your family you can't even bind the powers that blind them and command them to move it and pray God opens their eyes, but then it's what a preacher said in a church I went to some months ago: Well I hope that my brother gets saved. I hope that God elected him. If you know your brother and you know he's not a psychopath who sins against the Spirit and God puts him on your heart (why would He put someone on your heart who can't be saved?), you can just pray and he will get saved. Household salvation.

 

[atpollard]

U: "unconditional election"
Calvinism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation and the others (reprobates) for damnation.
Arminianism: Before the world was created, God foresaw those who would choose Him of their own free will and elected them to salvation
Lutheranism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation but did not reprobate (chose for damnation) any.
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 9:11-13; 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; Mat. 25:34, 41.
Josiah: This is half right. I agree with predestination to heaven but not to hell.

Just to set the record straight …

The position that you list as “Calvinism” is a heretical position called “HyerCalvinism” and is held by very few.
The Westminster Confession of Faith describes the official Calvinist position as follows (critical portions for this discussion are underlined):

Of God’s Eternal Decree​

1. God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
2. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass, upon all supposed conditions; yet hath He not decreed any thing because He foresaw it as future, as that which would come to pass, upon such conditions.
3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.
4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished.
5. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.
6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are elected being fallen in Adam are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
7. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.
8. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending to the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God; and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.

My point is that the actual Calvinist and Lutheran positions on THIS are identical. God chose the saved … God did not predestine the damned (“passed over” is the WCF term). Like Romans 1:18-31 … God gave them over to their desires. The damned got what they wanted (followed by the Justice they deserved). The saved got what God wanted (a new heart) followed by the Mercy we did not deserve.

 

[Albion]

You are right, Messy.

Parts of the TULIP line-up are accepted by other Christians because parts of it are correct. However, there are quite a few Christians who, when questioned about it will say--half jokingly but still seriously--that they are 4 point Calvinists or 3 point Calvinists, etc.

 

[Albion]

Would you be willing to insert the opposite of TULIP into those verses and accept the anti-Calvinist Bible?

• Instead of “depraved”, insert “good” (Men don’t actually NEED a savior because they have the power to save themselves - Pelagianism)
• Instead of “unconditional”, insert “conditional” (God chose you because YOU DESERVED IT).
• Instead of “died to save”, insert “died to purchase a chance to save themself” (Ineffectual Atonement requires HUMAN activation to be effective).
• Instead of “irresistible”, insert “resistible” (God can do NOTHING without the permission of MEN).
• Instead of “saved”, insert “momentarily on the path to heaven, but only one sin away from returning to damnation”.

The “Free Will” Bible is a much scarier thing than the Doctrines of Grace and the Sovereign God that “has mercy on whom He has mercy”.

Which, I have long thought, is why Calvinism is appealing (to some). The TULIP scheme seems systematic and/or logical, and it puts all the difficult things totally into God's hands.

It's disturbing to think that we mortals have any choices to make that deal with gaining or losing salvation, even if we've had the way opened for us by Christ, so this (TULIP) seems to satisfy.
Whether or not it's correct is another matter, of course.

And many who look at the matter this way tell themselves "I've been good" or "I haven't murdered anyone," so they surmise that they're probably in the "saved" group, even while acknowledging that there's no guarantee.

 

[Messy]

-

 

[Messy]

I’ll take your word for it. The internet has too many videos by “experts” wanting to explain what the Bible REALLY means for me to waste time watching every posted video. I tend to almost never watch posted videos unless I recognize the people in the video (like excerpts from some famous theologians debating).

I would suggest that criteria applies to “the Jewish guy” and his position as much as it applies to the position of anyone else. I have posted John 6:44 … what have I misunderstood in what John said and what did John REALLY MEAN in John 6:44?

He says a predetermined choice is an oxymoron. Moses says choose Life and other texts say He predetermines. The only way to come to a theology that says it's completely out of our hands or completely in our hands is to cherry pick certain verses.
There's a tension.
John 6:44 Noone can come to Me except the Father draws him.
James 4:8 Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.
Who draws first?
It's both true, so does God make it unable for some to resist Him or does He just make it possible?
Is the whole question moot because there is never a salvation where God choses us but we don't also chose Him.
God simultaneously predetermines and allows us the freedom to chose.

 

[Albion]

Hyper-Calvinism is a branch of Protestant theology that denies the universal duty of human beings to believe in Christ for the salvation of their souls.

Had no idea. That explains a lot.

I'm not an expert on Calvinism, but I wonder what some other reader might take from that explanation. Surely there is another and better one, and the one you used is, I believe, taken from a Wikipedia article.

If it was your choice to look at the matter in greater depth, I think you'd find that "Hyper-Calvinism," a very informal term which describes few Calvinists, holds that because God has chosen his Elect from all eternity, nothing will change that, so there is no point in the church attempting to evangelize the public, either at home or elsewhere.

As a result, engaging in missionary projects such as most other churches do means that those people who would be approached are likely to include some who are destined for eternal life along with others who are irredeemably bound for hell. And merely preaching to those populations could be worse than useless if preaching the Gospel actually confused hearers who are the Elect.

In other respects, my understanding is that congregations that are sometimes called "Hyper-Calvinistic" are basically the same in belief and practice as other conservative Reformed churches.

​

 

[atpollard]

What is hyper-Calvinism? (got questions)

A simple definition is this: hyper-Calvinism is the belief that God saves the elect through His sovereign will with little or no use of the methods of bringing about salvation (such as evangelism, preaching, and prayer for the lost). To an unbiblical fault, the hyper-Calvinist over-emphasizes God’s sovereignty and under-emphasizes man’s responsibility in the work of salvation.

An obvious ramification of hyper-Calvinism is that it suppresses any desire to evangelize the lost. Most churches or denominations that hold to hyper-Calvinistic theology are marked by fatalism, coldness, and a lack of assurance of faith. There is little emphasis upon God’s love for the lost and His own people but rather an unbiblical preoccupation with God’s sovereignty, His election of the saved, and His wrath for the lost. The gospel of the hyper-Calvinist is a declaration of God’s salvation of the elect and His damnation of the lost.

The Bible clearly teaches that God is sovereign over the entire universe (Daniel 4:34-35), including the salvation of men (Ephesians 1:3-12). But with God’s sovereignty, the Bible also teaches that His motivation for saving the lost is love (Ephesians 1:4-5; John 3:16; 1 John 4:9-10) and that God’s means of saving the lost is the proclamation of His Word (Romans 10:14-15). The Bible also declares that the Christian is to be passionate and determined in his/her sharing with unbelievers; as ambassadors for Christ, we are to "beg" people to be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:20-21).

Hyper-Calvinism takes a biblical doctrine, God’s sovereignty, and pushes it to an unbiblical extreme. In doing so, the hyper-Calvinist downplays the love of God and the necessity of evangelism.

 

[atpollard]

Reformed Theology vs. Hyper-Calvinism (Ligonier Ministries)

Before the average believer today learns what Reformed theology (i.e., Calvinism) actually is, he first usually has to learn what it’s not. Often, detractors define Reformed theology not according to what it actually teaches, but according to where they think its logic naturally leads. Even more tragically, some hyper-Calvinists have followed the same course. Either way, “Calvinism” ends up being defined by extreme positions that it does not in fact hold as scriptural. The charges leveled against Reformed theology, of which hyper-Calvinism is actually guilty, received a definitive response at the international Synod of Dort (1618–1619), along with the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms.

Is the Gospel for Everyone?​

Isn’t it a bit of false advertising to say on one hand that God has already determined who will be saved and on the other hand to insist that the good news of the Gospel be sincerely and indiscriminately proclaimed to everyone?

But didn’t Christ die for the elect alone? The Canons of Dort pick up on a phrase that was often found in the medieval textbooks (“sufficient for the world, efficient for the elect only”) when it affirms that Christ’s death “is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world” (Second Head, Article 3). Therefore, we hold out to the world “the promise of the gospel . . . to all persons . . . without distinction . . . .” Although many do not embrace it, this “is not owing to any defect or insufficiency in the sacrifice offered by Christ upon the cross, but is wholly to be imputed to themselves” (Second Head, Articles 5–6).

Here once again we are faced with mystery — and the two guardrails that keep us from careening off the cliff in speculation. God loves the world and calls everyone in the world to Christ outwardly through the Gospel, and yet God loves the elect with a saving purpose and calls them by His Spirit inwardlythrough the same Gospel (John 6:63–64; 10:3–5, 11, 14–18, 25–30; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:28–30; 2 Tim. 1:9). Both Arminians and hyper-Calvinists ignore crucial passages of Scripture, resolving the mystery in favor of the either-or: either election or the free offer of the Gospel.

 

[Messy]

I'm not an expert on Calvinism, but I wonder what some other reader might take from that explanation. Surely there is another and better one, and the one you used is, I believe, taken from a Wikipedia article.

If it was your choice to look at the matter in greater depth, I think you'd find that "Hyper-Calvinism," a very informal term which describes few Calvinists, holds that because God has chosen his Elect from all eternity, nothing will change that, so there is no point in the church attempting to evangelize the public, either at home or elsewhere.

As a result, engaging in missionary projects such as most other churches do means that those people who would be approached are likely to include some who are destined for eternal life along with others who are bound for hell. And merely preaching to those populations could be worse than useless if preaching the Gospel actually confused hearers who are the Elect.

In other respects, my understanding is that congregations that are sometimes called "Hyper-Calvinistic" are basically the same in belief and practice as other conservative Reformed churches.

​

I didn't look any further, but the wiki explanation is exactly what bright flame or what's his name says.

 

[atpollard]

What is Hyper Calvinism (Protestant Reformed Churches in America)

We would emphasize, first, that there is such a thing as hyper-Calvinism, though some would deny this. Historically, the name has been applied to those who deny that the command of the gospel to repent and believe must be preached to all who hear the gospel.
A hyper-Calvinist, therefore, is not someone who teaches that in predestination, in the death of Christ in the preaching, and in the work of the Spirit, God loves only the elect and intends only their salvation. That is simply Biblical Calvinism.
Rather a hyper-Calvinist (historically and doctrinally) is someone who, because all are not chosen and redeemed, will not command all who hear the gospel to repent and believe. He is someone who starts from the right premises, but draws the wrong conclusions - who does not believe that "God now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30).
A true hyper-Calvinist, then, is one who believes rightly in sovereign, double predestination and in particular redemption - who denies a universal love of God and a will of God to save all men. Yet he concludes wrongly that because God has determined who will be saved, sent Christ for them only, and gives to them salvation as a free gift, therefore only the elect should be commanded to repent and believe in the preaching of the gospel.
This, we believe, is a serious error. It is an error that effectively destroys both gospel preaching and evangelism - an error that must be avoided.

 

[atpollard]

Now you have THREE witness from Reformed sources attempting to explain the difference. Make of their testimony whatever you will.

 

[Messy]

Now you have THREE witness from Reformed sources attempting to explain the difference. Make of their testimony whatever you will.

I looked up if that also exists in Holland. That guy says it is a dangerous Dutch phenomenon. Ah. So that's what we called the black socks churches. Not allowed to do anything on Sunday. 10 percent from the church takes the communion. The rest is not surely elected, saved or good enough and until their death they are not sure if they are saved. And ppl who hated this and came out of it are now atheist. One such a writer said that when his mother, who was just sweet and always went to church, died, the reverend said that she went to hell.