Visitors from around the World

Translate blog:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Announcements

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

facebook: Discerning the World

Sign up to Receive Email Updates


powered by MailChimp!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Recent Comments

General Comments Section:

Click here for the General Comments Section Discerning the World - General Conversation Section

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Article Archive

Click here to find a List of all Articles List of all Articles
Click here to find a List of all Categories to search by Categories / Keywords

Website Stats

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Calvinism, The Greatest God-Sent Delusion of all Time

Calvinism, The Greatest God-Sent Delusion of all Time

CALVINISM, THE GREATEST GOD-SENT DELUSION OF ALL TIME

There is a way that seems right but the end thereof are the ways of death – TULIP

I  am deeply and sincerely convinced that Calvinism, also known as Reformed Theology, entrenched in the acronym T U L I P, is one of the best top ranked and most dangerous deceptions God Himself has sent to judge those who believe in its vile doctrines. Paul announces God’s judgment on all those who dare to misrepresent his Gospel of salvation in 2 Thessalonians 2 verses 8 to 12.

And then the lawless one (the antichrist) will be revealed and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of His mouth and bring him to an end by His appearing at His coming.

The coming [of the lawless one, the antichrist] is through the activity and working of Satan and will be attended by great power and with all sorts of [pretended] miracles and signs and delusive marvels—[all of them] lying wonders—

And by unlimited seduction to evil and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing (going to perdition because they did not welcome the Truth but refused to love it that they might be saved.

Therefore God sends upon them a misleading influence, a working of error and a strong delusion to make them believe what is false, In order that all may be judged and condemned who did not believe in [who refused to adhere to, trust in, and rely on] the Truth, but [instead] took pleasure in unrighteousness. (AMP)

Don’t be misled by the reference to false signs and wonders and think that, because Calvinists are cessationists, the indictment cannot be applied to Reformed Theology. The main reason for their severe condemnation is not because they indulge in false or pretended signs and wonders.

The reason why they are severely judged, is because they trample underfoot the truth in regard to the way of salvation. As a matter of fact, they have completely ruled out faith in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross as a precondition and the only requirement for salvation.

The Calvinists’ requirement for salvation is: first election and then faith. Election determines whether you are going to believe or not believe, and you will of necessity believe or not believe, because you are void of any choice to either believe or not to believe. Indeed, as an elect you WILL believe, and as a non-elect you WILL NOT believe, because you have no choice (free-will) in the matter of salvation.

Calvinists are the most adamant, obstinate, unyielding, obdurate, stubborn and unteachable bunch of sinners on the planet. You may probably ask, “why?” Because God, who is unyielding in his sovereignty, has completely and utterly given them over, boots and all, to the strongest delusion imaginable.

The delusion is so intensely strong that very few Calvinists are being, and have been, delivered from its abhorrent clutches. If there ever was a doctrine that tickles the ears of those who firmly believe they are saved because they are the so-called elect, it is the Doctrines of Grace.

Bear in mind that the term “Doctrines of Grace” is a very shrewd replacement for the word “Calvinism” to divert the attention from the serial killer, John Calvin’s, abominable deadly persecution and killing sprees in Geneva. There is nothing that sounds so sweet and yet so diabolically deceptive than the mantra “I am one of the elect few who was chosen to be saved before the foundation of the world.” (Notice how John MacArthur articulates this beautifully deceptive mantra later in this article when he tells his right hand man, Phil Johnson, “[I] NEVER REBELLED AND ALWAYS BELIEVED.” What MacArthur forgets is that the Doctrine of Election unto salvation (TULIP) IS in essence rebellion against God).

It is God’s good pleasure that Calvinists believe what is false

Why did God give them over to this exceptionally strong delusion? To begin with, He sent them the strong delusion so that they may believe what is false. It’s as simple as that. Let me repeat that: The reason why God sent them a strong delusion is because he wants them to believe what is false? He actually wants them to believe what is false.

You may again ask, “why?” The main reason for their God-sent delusion is because they shun, trample under foot, despise, spurn and deride God’s Gospel which is forever entrenched in His words, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

In short, they have rejected the only and true way of being saved because they take pleasure in unrighteousness. Anyone who dares to tamper with God’s universal love in salvation (Titus 2:11), is not playing with fire to warm oneself by, but with the fires of hell itself. Paul reinforces this when he says,

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-9)

What do some of the best top ranked deceivers in the Reformed Camp say about John 3:16?

John MacArthur doesn’t seem to know what to believe about John 3:16. At first he admits that God loves everyone, and then that He does not love all people in the same way. How can there be two or more ways for God to express his love for lost sinners when there is only one supreme way He chose to express it – i.e. by giving his Son as a substitutionary sacrifice to the entire world? Unless, of course, God did not send his Son in behalf of the entire world but only the so-called elect.  In MacArthur’s view, God’s love is split in two ways – a temporal love expressed in his gracious gifts of rain, air and sunshine and an eternal love, expressed in salvation. He wrote:

I am troubled by the tendency of some — often young people, newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine — who insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe. I encounter that view, it seems, with increasing frequency.

John MacArthur is mistaken when he says young people who are infatuated with Reformed doctrine, insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe. There are many older Calvinists who believe the same lie. (Read here and here).

John MacArthur firmly asserts that man is completely unable to repent and believe the Gospel of his own accord, and must therefore be regenerated first by a sovereign act of God and only then, subsequent to his monergistic regeneration be given the gift of faith. Those “who never repent and believe” are, in MacArthur’s view, the reprobate who don’t have, and never will have the ability to repent and believe, because God has chosen them unto damnation before the foundation of the world.

And so, for him to rebuke the young people who declare that God cannot possibly love the reprobate, is nothing else than downright hypocrisy. What kind of love is it when God sends those whom He has not chosen unto salvation to hell, because it supposedly glorifies and pleases Him? MacArthur continues to say.

The argument inevitably goes like this: Psalm 7:11 tells us, “God is angry with the wicked every day.” It seems reasonable to assume that if God loved everyone, He would have chosen everyone unto salvation. Therefore, God does not love the non-elect.

Those who hold this view, often go to great lengths to argue that John 3:16 cannot really mean God loves the whole world. Perhaps the best-known argument for this view is found in the unabridged edition of an otherwise excellent book, The Sovereignty of God, by A. W. Pink. Pink wrote, “God loves whom He chooses.

He does not love everybody.” He further argued that the word world in John 3:16 (“For God so loved the world…”) “refers to the world of believers (God’s elect), in contradistinction from ‘the world of the ungodly.'” Unfortunately, Pink took the corollary too far. The fact that some sinners are not elected to salvation is no proof that God’s attitude toward them is utterly devoid of sincere love.

We know from Scripture that God is compassionate, kind, generous, and good even to the most stubborn sinners.Who can deny that those mercies flow out of God’s boundless love? It is evident, that they are showered, even on unrepentant sinners. (Emphasis added).

MacArthur’s eulogy to God being compassionate, kind, generous and good, even to the most stubborn sinners, whom He did not elect unto salvation because it pleases Him to send them to hell, sounds more like a quote from the Quran than from the Bible. The Quran, also refers to Allah as the most beneficent, merciful and compassionate, whilst he passionately hates the infidels (non-Muslims, non elect) and sends them to hell.

MacArthur uses words that are completely incompatible with Calvinism. In fact they are non-existent in Calvinism. The terminology “unrepentant sinners,” for instance, cannot be applied to neither the elect nor the non-elect.

The elect have no need to repent because they are regenerated without them having to perceive, become aware or understand the moment when they are/were saved. In fact, it just happens to them when God monergistically intervenes and sovereignly makes them alive (regenerates them) without faith because they have always been God’s believing sheep. (Note MacArthur’s testimony further down in the article).

Likewise, the words “unrepentant sinners” are meaningless in regard to the non-elect. How can they possibly be described as unrepentant sinners when they are completely unable to repent because God refuses to draw them to his Son (John 6:44)?

At any rate, the concept of stubbornness is equally taboo in Calvinism, simply  because free-will, the ability to choose between two opposites, is equally taboo in Calvinism. It is impossible to be stubborn without a free-will. Stubbornness is anchored in the ability to choose either for or against the thing offered to you.

If God has pre-ordained and predestined everything that comes to pass, then He must have decreed the reprobate’s stubbornness  as well. This leads to the bizarre situation where God first decrees, predestines, or foreordains the reprobate sinners’ stubbornness, then He passionately loves them despite their stubbornness, as Macarthur says, and ultimately holds them responsible for their stubbornness and sends them to hell.

And this, my dear friends, is how the god of the Calvinists showers his love on the reprobate, or as MacArthur calls them, stubborn sinners. MacArthur continues to say.

At this point, however, an important distinction must be made: God loves believers with a particular love. God’s love for the elect is an infinite, eternal, saving love. We know from Scripture that this great love was the very cause of our election (Ephesians 2 verse 4).

Such love clearly is not directed toward all of mankind indiscriminately, but is bestowed uniquely and individually on those whom God chose in eternity past. But from that, it does not follow that God’s attitude toward those He did not elect must be unmitigated hatred.

Surely His pleading with the lost, His offers of mercy to the reprobate, and the call of the gospel to all who hear are all sincere expressions of the heart of a loving God. Remember, He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but tenderly calls sinners to turn from their evil ways and live.

Pink, was attempting to make the crucial point that God is sovereign in the exercise of His love. The gist of his argument is certainly valid: It is folly to think that God loves all alike, or that He is compelled by some rule of fairness to love everyone equally.

Scripture teaches us that God loves because He chooses to love (Deuteronomy 7 verses 6 to 7), because He is loving (God is love, 1 John 4 verse 8), not because He is under some obligation to love everyone the same.

Nothing but God’s own sovereign good pleasure that compels Him, to love sinners. Nothing but His own sovereign will governs His love. That, has to be true, since there is certainly nothing in any sinner worthy of even the smallest degree of divine love. (Emphasis added).

Nothing but God’s own sovereign will governs his love and all Calvinists have the sovereign will power to make this so-called truism a decree? Wow!

God pleads with the reprobate to repent and believe the Gospel while He has ordained and predestined them to an eternal punishment in hell before the foundation of the world? Really?

He offers the reprobate his mercy whilst He mercilessly decided to send them to hell before the foundation of the world? Really? This is the kind of schizophrenic God reformed theologians (Calvinists) just adore to present to the world.

The god of Calvinism (Reformed Theology) is NOT, I repeat, Not the God of the Bible, of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but a false God. In fact, he is nothing but an idol.

It is not God’s own sovereign good pleasure that compels Him to love sinners. He loves sinners because He is the ESSENCE OF LOVE and has no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33 verse 11), and wants everyone to be saved (2 Peter 3 verse 9).

If, as John MacArthur says, God’s own sovereign good pleasure compels Him to love sinners, and only the elect benefit from his saving love because the reprobate have no chance in hell of ever being saved, it follows that only the elect are sinners. Jesus said, that He had come to seek and to save lost sinners.

If all of mankind are/were lost sinners it logically follows that He had come to save all of mankind because all are sinners. Will all of mankind eventually be saved? Perish the thought. The Calvinist view that if Jesus came to save all of mankind because all are lost, He would have been a dismal failure because not all are being saved.

Therefore, the only option open for Him to be a success is to have Him love and die only for the elect and to save them all without distinction. I have yet to find a Calvinist who has the chutzpah to explain to me Isaiah 49:4 in the light of their assumption that Jesus would have been a failure if He had come to save all of mankind. This is what Isaiah 49:4 says,

Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God. (Isa 49:4)

If, God had already decided, before the foundation of the world not to send his Son to suffer and die for the non-elect, then the non-elect, are not lost sinners. Only those, for whom He had come to save are sinners, and that could of a necessity only be the elect because they are the only ones being saved, according to Calvinism.

I would like to suggest that Calvinists gather for a world-wide conference and call it “LOVE OR HATRED OR LOVE AND HATRED?”They can’t decide whether God loves or hates sinners or whether he schizophrenically and simultaneously loves and hates sinners. And perhaps they should rehash and change John 3:16 to read as follows.

For God so loved and hated the world (please bear in mind that “world” in John 3:16 refers to the world of the elect and not the non-elect), that he gave his only begotten Son (to the world of the elect), so that the world of the elect who are granted the gift of faith after they had been monergtistically regenerated, should not perish, but have everlasting life.

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world of the elect; but that the world of the elect through him might be saved.

Listen to what this godly sheep has to say about God’s love/hate relationship with sinners (the elect). If there is anything uplifting to learn from this video, it is to beware of little orange books written by Calvinists.

To understand the true meaning of Psalm 5:5, please read the article “Psalm 5 verse 5: ‘God Hates Sinners.'” Click on the “I love u/hate u” banner.

Hate

 

What the false prophet, David Platt, seems to misunderstand is that “hatred” is the complete opposite of “love.” If so, the opposite of John 3:16 would read as follows,

For God so hated the world, that he did NOT give his only begotten Son, so that everyone should perish.

In case you’ve missed Platt’s reason for God having poured out his righteous wrath on his Son on the cross, let me repeat what he says more or less 6 minutes and 30 seconds into the video.

“Does God hate sinners? Look at Isaiah 53 verses 4 through six. All of these things – pierced, crushed, punishment, wounds, all of these things are evidence of the wrath of God upon sinners. Look at the cross. Absolutely, God hates sin and sinners. Does God love sinners? Look at the cross because the Lord’s will for sin was to crush his Son for the salvation of his people.

No Platt, it is NOT what Isaiah 53:4-6 tells us. It does NOT tell us “all of these things – pierced, crushed, punishment, wounds are evidence of the wrath of God upon sinners. ” It tells us that God loves lost sinners so much and does not want them to perish, the result being that He poured his wrath out on his incarnated only begotten Son so that whosoever believes on Him may not have to bear the brunt of His wrath for all eternity in hell. Paul reiterates this truth in Romans 8.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned “sin” in the flesh: (Romans 8:3).

God focused his wrath on man’s sin and not man himself. God’s wrath will only be poured out on man himself when he, after having remained unrepentant all his life and refused to respond in obedience to the Gospel call, will be cast into the Lake of Fire subsequent to the White Throne Judgment of God. (Read Psalm 73 with special refrence to verses 17 to 19). Sinners who refuse to accept and receive God’s gift of forgiveness on the basis that He has already punished their sin in his Son’s flesh on the cross, will have to face God’s wrath and consequences in hell.

Paul Washer

The false prophet, Paul Washer

Like Paul Washer, David Platt seems to be one of the more gentlemanly type of Calvinists to grace our world. He doesn’t openly say: “God hates the non-elect and loves the elect.” He ever so gently points to the cross to prove that Christ died only for his people. Who is God’s people?

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize that he is referring to the elect. Note carefully how he barely noticeably differentiates between God’s attitude to the non-elect and His attitude to his people (the elect).

When Platt says “God hates sin and sinners,” he evidently refers to the non-elect because they are not God’s people and therefore the only culprits whom God hates in tandem with their sins. Then suddenly, Platt’s face lights up when he says, immediately after his assertion that God hates sin and sinners, that God absolutely loves sinners.

How are we supposed to reconcile the paradox that God hates sinners and also loves sinners? It’s rather easy when you differentiate between non-elect sinners and elect sinners. In the latter instance God hates their sin but loves the sinner and, guess what, in the non-elect’s case he hates both the sinner and their sins.

It is imperative that we learn to listen very carefully to Calvinists and their preaching. They are past masters at saying things that are 99,9 percent correct and to slip in a 0.1 percent little lie to deceive their listeners. Would you drink a glass of water polluted with 0.1 percent of a lethal poison?

MacArthur is not so subtle and gentlemanly as David Platt. He openly says that God only loves the elect with a saving love. Listen very carefully and you will hear a demon (lying spirit) speaking through John MacArthur.

Depending on what you are, an elect or a non-elect, God is glorified at any rate. If you are not elected, God is glorified because he does not love you with a saving love and if you are an elect He is equally glorified because He loves you with a saving love.

This is what the Bible calls “holding the truth in unrighteousness.” (Romans 1:18). A God who sovereignly chose the elect unto salvation and the reprobate unto damnation before the foundation of the world, and yet allegedly still lovingly pleads with the reprobate to respond to the call of the Gospel because He sincerely and indiscriminately loves them, is the epitome of unrighteousness.

It is not only a gross misrepresentation of God, but pure blasphemy. It’s like saying,: “I dearly and sincerely love you, but not enough to want you to be in heaven with me. My love for you, expressed in raindrops falling on your head, and the sun shining into your boudoir every morning, is sufficient to prove to you that I really, truly and sincerely love you. But I cannot possibly love you in the same way I love my blue-eyed predestined and elected favourites. Therefore I have given you two diametrically opposite renditions of John 3:16 – one for the elect and one for the non-elect.”

The one for the elect goes like this:

For God so loved the world (OF THE ELECT), that he gave his only begotten Son (TO THE WORLD OF THE ELECT), that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world (THE WORLD OF THE ELECT) to condemn the world (OF THE ELECT); but that the world (WORLD OF THE ELECT) through him might be saved.

The one fro the non-elect goes like this:

For God so loved the world (OF THE NON ELECT) that He gave them the sun to shine on their brow and the rain to fall on their head. He also gave the world (OF THE NON ELECT) his Son to plead with them because “His offers of mercy to the reprobate, and the call of the gospel to all who hear are all sincere expressions of the heart of a loving God.”

Remember, He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked reprobate, but tenderly calls them to turn from their evil ways and live. Yet in his sincere and tender love for the world (OF THE WICKED REPROBATE) He decided before the foundation of the world to send them to hell.

According to Calvinists God says in effect: Since they are so very special to me, I have added to my raindrop-and-sun-shine kind of love for them, an infinitely greater love, a love that saves. This love is infinitely greater than my love in John 3:16 which is merely an offer to love the reprobate on condition that they believe on my Son.

Nevertheless, my offer to love them, on condition they repent and believe the Gospel, can never become a reality because I have decided to withhold my gift of saving faith from them so that I may send them to hell and be glorified so much the better.

Once again, this is nothing else than holding God’s universal love for all mankind in blatant unrighteousness, a sin worthy of the indictment in 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 8 to 12.

The ultimate Calvinistic paradox (hidden in classical RCC Mystagogy)

How do you reconcile the paradox of a loving God who wants all people to be saved, because He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but sovereignly chose not to save the majority of people, because it is his good pleasure to send them to hell? You don’t, because it is a mystery hidden in the secret counsel of God.

By the by, this infamous and mysterious paradox is one of the shameless seeds of unrighteousness that has come from the Roman Catholic Church, and very quickly found a niche in Reformed Theology in the writings of John Calvin..

The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 says,

“Those of mankind who are predestined 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 to everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving Him thereunto.”

Calvinists often use the phrases “the secret counsel of his will” and “God’s sovereignty” to cover up their unrighteous misrepresentation of God and his love. When the High Priest, asked Jesus about his teachings (doctrines), He told Him that He never said anything in secret.

“Jesus answered him, “I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret.” (John 18:20).

If Jesus’s mission to the earth was to seek and to save lost sinners, as He Himself once said, then surely his mission of salvation could never have been done partly in secrecy. Not a single dot and iota of his mission to seek and to save lost sinners would have been cloaked in “the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will.”

Beside the fact that the phrase “the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will” never once appear in Scripture, Calvinists attribute occult practices to God because the occult is usually practiced in a shroud of secrecy, obscurity and unclearness. Calvin wrote in his Institutes of the Christian Religion,

Those, therefore, whom God passes by, he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines to his children.

But if all whom the Lord predestines to death, are naturally liable to sentence of death, of what injustice, pray, do they complain because by his eternal providence they were before their birth doomed to perpetual destruction, what will they be able to mutter against this defence? Of this, no other cause can be adduced than reprobation, which is hidden in the secret counsel of God.

Now since the arrangement of all things is in the hand of God, He arranges that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction. God, according to the good pleasure of his will, without any regard to merit, elects those whom he chooses for sons, while he rejects and reprobates others.

It is right for him to show by punishing that he is a just judge. Here the words of Augustine most admirably apply. When other vessels are made unto dishonour, it must be imputed not to injustice, but to judgment.

One of the greatest mysteries (mystagogies) in Calvinism is that they claim to know and understand the hidden and secret counsels of God. Surely, if salvation the most vital of God’s counsels and decrees, is shrouded in secrecy, how do Calvinists know what God’s secret counsels are?

They state with emphatic assurance that God passes by whom He reprobates and that for no other cause but because He is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which He predestines to his children.

They also state with unhesitant assurance that man has no right to question God’s eternal providence to doom some before their birth to perpetual destruction because this is hidden in the secret counsel and will of God. How dare they declare word for word what God has decided before the foundation of the world when it is hidden in his secret counsel?

What they mean, is that God has decided to choose some to eternal bliss and others to eternal damnation but nobody knows why. It’s a secret and will never be revealed to man until eternity knocks on the door. And yet Calvinists have the audacity to declare the so-called secret counsel of God word for word.

RC Sporul

The false prophet, RC Sproul

Calvinists take refuge in the silly metaphor of two parallel train tracks that never come together but seem to merge in the distance to illustrate that the truth in regard to elective salvation will only be revealed in eternity.

According to this, the vilest of the vile doctrines devised and instituted by a serial killer, God, in the secret counsel and the good pleasure of his will, made the following horrific decision, “I wish to glorify myself to the uttermost and have, therefore, arranged that some babies should be doomed to hell, even from before they are conceived in their mothers’ womb.”

No wonder, Calvinists believe that God decreed babies to be raped. Listen carefully to James White’s hideous explanation, when asked whether God decrees the rape of little babies.

Apparently it’s OK, to rape little babies, because God, has ordained some of them to everlasting destruction.

So, if God deems it necessary to predestine some babies to eternal destruction, so that He may be glorified, then a child rapist who rapes and kills babies for his good pleasure, is merely helping God to get the reprobate babies into hell much quicker, and hence to get the glory God wants for Himself, even much sooner.

And in case you may think you are listening to a sci-fi story, listen to RC Sproul’s definition of God’s sovereignty.

False Teachers and Their Allegiance to Satan

False Teachers and Their Common Allegiance to Satan

Did you hear what Anton LaVey said? “I believe that hatred is necessary in a controlled way as much is love is necessary.” Here again we have the duality (the YinYang concept) in God’s character, as David Platt described it. Both love and hatred for sinners are compatible with God.

This, is how the Westminster Confession of Faith sounds like when you bring God’s decree of the rape and killing of little babies into the equation.

“God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably, ordain whatsoever comes to pass, (including the rape and killing of little babies).”

And in case you do not believe it, you are summarily branded an atheist, because if you don’t believe God ordained everything that comes to pass (including the rape and killing of little babies), you are accusing God of being unsovereign, and if He’s not sovereign, He is not God, and if He’s not God, then you don’t believe in God.

Therefore, you are an atheist. So please, realize and understand, that there is only one way to be converted from atheism to Calvinism and that is to believe in God’s sovereign decree that He ordained babies to be raped.

James White

The false prophet, James White

There is a vast difference between God causing a child to be raped because He allegedly has a greater purpose in view and Him overturning the heinous sin to glorify Himself. I have heard of babies being raped and slaughtered in front of their mothers who refused to deny and disown Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour.

It would be rank blasphemy to say that God caused or predestined the babies to be raped and killed so that He may be glorified. How then is He glorified in situations like these? He is glorified in the mothers who steadfastly remain faithful to Him no matter what the circumstances and because they know and believe that their murdered babies will be in heaven with them one day.

The Calvinistic view that God causes babies to be raped and killed because his purpose is to be glorified, is akin to the ancient Canaanite pagans who sacrificed their children through fire in honor of their god, Molech. (Leviticus 20:2).

The obvious reason why Calvinists cannot see that what they believe to be God’s sovereignty and his so-called hidden purposes is demonic, is because God deliberately blinded their eyes to the truth so that they may believe the lie and be judged accordingly.

You may have heard James White saying “there is no reason for despair” when suffering has meaning and a purpose. “All suffering has purpose,” he said. What does He mean?

To understand what he said, we need to take his Calvinistic doctrines of grace into account. To illustrate we need to make a distinction between Mother Elect and Mother Non-elect whose babies are automatically Baby Elect and Baby Non-elect respectively.

When Baby Non-elect is raped and killed, is it meaningless and purposeless or meaningful and purposeful? Well, it cannot be dubbed meaningless and purposeless because God had already predestined Baby Non-elect to be cast into hell even before the foundation of the world so that He may be glorified. His purpose, Mr. White, is and has always been to send Baby Non-elect to hell. Therefore, it cannot be meaningless and purposeless.

Similarly, Baby Elect of Mother Elect was predestined to go to heaven before the foundation of the world. So, whether Baby Elect is raped and killed as an infant or grows up and is later raped and killed, the purpose remains the same. Therefore, again, God’s decree is not meaningless and purposeless.

Voila! Mr. White is correct in saying “their is no reason for despair,” at least in the eye of the Calvinist, because the non-elect’s ultimate destination in hell is no reason for concern or despair.

How do you identify a Calvinist?

You don’t need to identify them. They love to identify themselves in their so-called testimonies.

John MacArthur says:

“God didn’t draw straws; He didn’t look down the corridor of time, to see who would choose Him before He decided. Rather, by His sovereign will, He chose who would be in the Body of Christ. The construction of the Greek verb for “chose” indicates, God chose us for Himself. That means God acted totally independent of any outside influence.

He made His choice totally apart from human will and purely on the basis of His sovereignty.

Jesus said to His disciples, “You did not choose, Me, but I chose, you.” (John 15:16). [Thomas says: Come on, John, don’t you know He also chose Judas Iscariot to be one of his disciples and he was a devil?]

And in the same Gospel, John wrote, “But as many as received Him, to them, He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

And Paul said, “But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth” (2 Thessalonians. 2 verse 13).

How do you identify a Calvinist? You only need to look at their beloved verses from Scripture, and their skill to avoid certain key passages in Scripture, and voila, you have successfully identified a Calvinist. MacArthur mentions two of their pet verses – John 15: 16 and 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

The irony is that Jesus also chose Judas Iscariot to follow Him as one of his disciples. His choice could not have been unto salvation, and if not unto salvation, then it must have been unto service. The employer chooses whom he wants to appoint in his business. The employee, has no choice in the process of appointments.

A closer reading of 2 Thessalonians 2:13, proves that Paul is not dealing with salvation in the normal sense of the word, (the redemption from sin, judgment and hell), but with “salvation through sanctification.”

Indeed, the context tells us that the salvation in this instance, (which is accomplished through sanctification), is the ultimate redemption at the Rapture, (the discarding of the saints’ earthly bodies to receive their new bodies like unto that of Jesus Christ).

Salvation in this context, is a redemption, by means of the Rapture, from the wrath of God, which is coming upon the entire world during the tribulation. Paul refers to this, as a salvation to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25). And so, Calvinists, regardless of the warning in 2 Peter 3:16, twist Scripture to their own destruction. R.C. Sproul, comments:

“The world for whom Christ died cannot mean the entire human family. It must refer to the universality of the elect (people from every tribe and nation)….” (Chosen By God, pages 206 and 207)

James White, states:

“He gave His only begotten Son, and here’s the purpose why He gave: The Son is given by the Father so that every believing one, notice not everyone, it’s every believing one, there is a limitation here, there is a particularity here, the Father did not give the Son for any other reason than for those, in regard to those who believe. That’s why the Son is given.”  (From “Does John 3:16 debunk Calvinism?”)

Whereas, the apostle John states that whosoever believes will not perish but have everlasting life, White says that it was the faith of the believing ones (the elect) that prompted God to send his Son. If the Son was given for no other reason than for those who believed, then the incentive to send His Son was not his love for lost sinners but the faith of the believing ones. John 3:16 according to White’s interpretation must then read as follows.

For God so loved the believing ones (elect) in the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, so that the believing ones should not perish, but have everlasting life.

This is the kind of garbage you will have to believe if you are a Calvinist. Since when do those who are already believing ones need to be saved? “OK, you precious believing ones. You are already saved but I still need to die on a cursed cross to save you,” is what Calvinists are forcing Jesus to say. I don’t know whether James failed to see this but his “believing ones” grossly contradicts the doctrines of grace’s “Total Depravity.” How on earth can anyone who is totally depraved and totally dead in sins and transgressions exercise faith in order to be a believing one? James White, like all our Calvinist friends and foes are wresting Scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16).

Consequently, it can be said that it was the faith of the believing ones that motivated God’s sovereign choice to send his Son to the world. What kind of sovereignty is this that could be manipulated by the faith of the believing ones (the elect), even to the point that their faith inspired God to send his Son to the world – not in behalf of the entire world but the world of the elect only? The two scenarios may be summed up as follows.

  1. God looked at the world and saw that all its inhabitants were hopelessly lost in sin, and out of pure undeserving love decided to send his Son Jesus Christ into the world, so that whosoever without distinction puts their trust in Him for their salvation, may receive eternal life.
  2. God looked at the world and saw that all its inhabitants were hopelessly lost in sin, but noticed a few believing ones (the sheep, whom He had elected and predestined before the foundation of the world), and out of pure undeserving love for them only decided to send his Son into the world so that the believing ones (the elect) may know and understand that they had already been saved from before the foundation of the world.

To ensure that his Son’s mission to the earth was not in vain, and that there would indeed be believing ones on the earth whom He could save, He decided to impart the gift of faith to a select few, by first regenerating them without them having to exercise faith of their own accord, and then, subsequent to their monergistic regeneration, grant them the gift of faith (Ephesians 2 verses 8 to 9).

Voila! “the Father did not give the Son for any other reason than for those, in regard to those who believe, that’s why the Son was given” and not because He loved the world.

How do Calvinists testify to their faith?

The best and only way to discern whether a person is saved or not, is to ask him or her of the hope that is in them (1 Peter 3:15). In an interview Phil Johnson had with John MacArthur, John explained his conversion as follows:

PHIL: “So you’re saying, are you saying it would be difficult for you to put your finger on when your conversion took place?”

JOHN: “Yeah. I’ve never been able to do that. And it doesn’t bother me. I think I’m one of those kids. I was one of those kids that NEVER REBELLED AND ALWAYS BELIEVED. And so, when God did His saving work in my heart, IT WAS NOT DISCERNIBLE TO ME.

I went away to high school and for all I knew, I loved Christ, I was part of the ministry of the church. I went away to college and I wanted to serve the Lord and honor the Lord. I was certainly immature.

But at some point along the line, I really do believe there was a transformation in my heart, but I think it may have been to some degree imperceptible to me, because I didn’t ever have a rebellious time, I didn’t ever revolt against, you know, the gospel or not believe.

And I guess that’s, in some ways that’s a grace act on God’s part. So that all that wonderful training found some level of fertile soil in my heart and none of it was wasted.” (Emphasis added).

Now, doesn’t this sound so much like the publican who, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, crying out to God in agony, God be merciful to me a sinner?

Not really! Fancy that, with a single sweep of the brush, John MacArthur obliterates the first letter “T” in the acronym TULIP. When he was a kid, he tells us, “Total Depravity” had NO part in the fiber of his pristine garment of self-righteousness.

In fact, he tells us in his own pristine self-righteous words that he never was so totally depraved as he likes to tell others how totally depraved they are.

Calvinists just love to remind other wretched sinners how depraved they are, even to the extent that it renders them completely powerless, incapable, and impotent to believe the Gospel, while they (like our learned and respected friend, John MacArthur) glory in their own pitiful self-righteous abilities to believe and never to rebel or revolt against God and his Gospel. This is Pharisaic hypocrisy at its very best.

In some ways, John MacArthur’s testimony is the same as that of Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

Charles Spurgeon

The false prophet, Charles Spurgeon

CHARLES: I suppose there are some persons whose minds naturally incline towards the doctrine of free will; I can only say that mine inclines as naturally towards the Doctrines of Sovereign Grace!

Sometimes, when I see some of the worst characters in the street, I feel as if my heart must burst forth in tears of gratitude, that God has never let me act as they have done! [Thomas says: The Roman Catholics also believes that Mary was miraculously preserved from sin. Read hear].

I have thought, if God had left me alone and had not touched me by His Grace, what a great sinner I would have been!

[Thomas says: What do you, my dearest reader, say is the difference between Spurgeon and the greatest missionary who ever lived – Paul of Tarsus?

The difference is that Paul was a humble man who admitted that he was the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), while Spurgeon boasted that he was not such a great sinner as Paul because God withheld him from sinning so greatly.]

I would have run to the utmost lengths of sin, and dived into the very depths of evil! Nor would I have stopped at any vice or folly, if God had not restrained me; I feel that I would have been a very king of sinners [or chief of sinners like Paul] if God had let me alone. [Parenthesis added).

I cannot understand the reason why I am saved, except upon the ground that God would have it so. [Thomas says: Paul’s reason for his salvation was because he knew and acknowledged that he was a rogue of a sinner who also knew in whom he believed – 2 Timothy 1:12].  I cannot, if I look ever so earnestly, discover any kind of reason in myself why I should be a partaker of Divine Grace. (Parenthesis added).

If I am at this moment with Christ, it is only because Christ Jesus would have His will with me, and that will was that I should be with Him where He is, and should share His Glory.

I can put the crown nowhere but upon the head of Him whose mighty Grace has saved me from going down into the pit of Hell!

And in many ways, both John MacArthur’s and Charles Haddon Spurgeon’s testimonies are the very same as the Pharisee’s testimony in Luke 18:11,

“PHARISEE: I thank thee that I am not as other men are, extortionists, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.”

John MacArthur states in “Understanding Election,”,

JOHN: “I’m a Christian today, because before the foundation of the world from all eternity past, God chose to set His love on John MacArthur and to give him the faith, to believe at the moment that God wanted him to believe. He chose us.”

He also emphatically declares,

JOHN: “You and I are saved and know the Lord Jesus Christ because God chose us before the world ever began.”

All these testimonies, including those of John MacArthur, Charles Spurgeon and James White, are outright denials of Jesus Christ’s words in John 16 verses 7 to 11,

JESUS: “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin!! because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.”

Show me a single reference to the elect in these words. Jesus never said the Holy Spirit would convince the elect that they had been selected unto salvation before the foundation of the world and that God has chosen to shower his saving love on them only.

The Holy Spirit’s conviction is not limited to the so-called world of the elect. He has come to convict the entire world that it is lost and on its way to hell because they believe not on Jesus Christ. Contrary to what Jesus said, John MacArthur claims that he was one of those wiz kids who never rebelled, and always believed.

If John MacArthur, as he claims, always believed, it follows that he had no need of the Holy Spirit to convict him of unbelief. Who should we believe – Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God, who cannot lie, and said that the Comforter would convict the entire world (including John MacArthur) of unbelief, or John MacArthur who says that he was one of those wiz kids who never rebelled and always believed?

Any court of law will reject the testimony of a witness when it detects the slightest inconsistency. We don’t have to examine MacArthur’s testimony very deeply to see that inconsistencies abound. First he says that he “was one of those kids who never rebelled and always believed” and then that “God chose to set His love on John MacArthur and to give him the faith to believe at the moment that God wanted him to believe.”

However, this paradox may be one of the enigmas hidden in the secret counsel of God which we are unable to understand right now and will have to wait until we reach eternity before we will understand it. Could it be that it is one of those things we now see though a glass darkly but in heaven spotlessly clearly? (1 Corinthians 13:12).

Bear in mind that salvation is such an important doctrine in the Bible that God chose not to disclose all of its wonderful characteristics to mortals.  That’s why it’s so difficult to understand why John MacArthur has always believed but was only given the gift to believe after his monergistic regeneration. Don’t try to understand it. Just go with the flow, as the modern-day alchemists would say.

John MacArthur is lying, unless there are two kinds of faith – one that cannot save (the faith of an always believing kid) and one that saves (the one God gives when it pleases Him to grant it).

Never once in its entirety does the Bible say God draws only the elect to Jesus Christ (John 6:44). All sinners are drawn (John 12:32), but only those who respond to the conviction of the Holy Spirit that they have sinned (in other words, do not believe on Jesus Christ as the Scriptures say – John 7:38), and realize, and acknowledge that their sins have caused them to become weary and heavy-laden and are lost, will come to Jesus for their salvation (Matthew 11:28; Romans 10:13; Matthew 9:12).

That’s precisely why Jesus said, “They, that are whole, need not a physician; but they, that are sick..” (Luke 5:31).

To assert that you have always believed, is to deny that you are sick and in dire need of a physician. John 6:44, one of the Calvinists pet verses to prove that God only draws the elect to Jesus, must be read in tandem with John 12:32.

It simply means that God alone was able to devise the means by which lost sinners are drawn to his Son – i.e. his cross.

Not even the Father, could have drawn lost sinners to his Son without his cross, because there was only one way to placate (propitiate) (1 John 2 verse 2) the enmity between mankind and Himself effectively, i.e. through the cross of Jesus Christ.

Tragically, however, Calvinists refuse to see it this way. They obstinately, ignore John 12:32 and thereby reinforce the vast deception God sent them so that they may believe what is false.

Once again, I must reiterate what I had said earlier: You become a very good candidate for a God sent delusion, when you tamper with God’s Gospel, and I can assure you that Reformed Theology (Calvinism in whatever form – 5 point, 4 point, or whatever), is not God’s Gospel. It is another Gospel and cannot save anyone on this planet.

John Piper

The false prophet, John Piper

John Piper is even more adept in his devious re-interpretation of John 3:16. In a video on his site, “Desiring God,” entitled ,“God so loved the world,” he endeavors to prove that there is an even greater love than God’s love in John 3:16.

It is vital to see, from the beginning, that Piper, like all his compatriots in the Calvinistic fold, make a huge difference between the love expressed in John 3:16, and his love for the elect.

And how does he go about proving this Calvinistic double-minded love of God? Let’s turn our ears to John Piper, explaining God’s greater love.

John 3:16 is so beautifully easy to understand, so clear-cut in its simplicity that even a child can understand it. Multitudes of Sunday school kids have come to know Christ and his love, through a child-like understanding of John 3:16.

Nonetheless, Piper, a staunch Calvinist and a promulgator of the doctrines of grace (TULIP), complicates God’s love and in humbleness – rarely seen among mortals – explains the complexity of God’s love in the following way,

“Help me with the wider context and the fullness of your revelation to know what you mean by loving us in this verse.”

Why should we ask God what He means by loving us in John 3:16, when He Himself said that we ought to ask the little children who have learned to sanctify God in their hearts and how to testify of the hope that is in them with meekness and fear? (1 Peter 3:15).

They know what the love of God in John 3:16 means, because they have experienced his love through faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross.

They have learned the true meaning of the love of God that is indelibly etched forever more in the torn body of his Son on the cross. What more do you need to understand his love in John 3:16?

What other kind of love surpasses God’s love as expressed in the final, ultimate, and most magnanimous, and infinitely immeasurable love in the torn body of his Son on the cross? Ah! But of course, John Piper has discovered a love that is far greater than God’s love in John 3:16, as we shall learn from his illustrious preaching later on.

Piper continues to define John 3:16 as the “free offer of the Gospel,” and says that he loves the free offer of the Gospel, because there are no limits to this offer. It was offered to every single human being who had ever lived, are alive today and shall be living in the future.

“So, what’s so controversial about that?” he asks. “Nothing! Unless you try to make this expression of the love of God cancel out another expression of the love of God— which is what many people do with this verse.

This is a great sadness and robs the church of one of her great treasures,” Piper affirms.

What Piper actually means is that the love of God in John 3:16 is not a saving love. It is merely a love offered to all mankind. It is not a love that overcomes, conquers and makes those to whom this love is offered his own.

It could be said that it is merely a shadow love because God’s genuine love is reserved only for the elect which is the greater love. If this is not a deliberate degradation of the cross of Jesus Christ which announces and demonstrates the greatest love ever to be experienced by man, I don’t know what is.

Piper is blaspheming the cross and the love of God to its utmost extremity and if he’s not careful to repent he will spend an eternity in hell.

The alleged diversity in God’s love, may be likened to a huge cake cut into slices of equal size, but of unequal importance and purpose.

One slice is given to the elect which they must eat because it is irresistibly sumptuous and compellingly forced down the elects’ throats, whilst the slice next to it is offered to the reprobate, but they may not eat it, because the offer is irresistibly and irrevocably concomitant with the sovereign decree He made before the foundation of the world, and that is to send them to hell.

How else will He get the glory, honor and pleasure He claims for Himself, as John MacArthur has said so succinctly. John Piper describes one of the other most important loves of God, as follows.

If this does not fill your heart with holy anger, then you ought to ask yourself whether you truly love Jesus Christ and his doctrine of salvation.

A love, WAAAY beyond the offer of John 3:16? A love, that is magnificently greater than John 3:16? Really? If, the offer in John 3:16 is a genuine offer, and If, the cross of Christ ratifies the offer through faith alone, nothing else can go WAAAY beyond its offer, because Christ crucified is the ultimate offering.

That is why Paul wrote “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified (1 Corinthians 2 verse 2) and, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Romans 1:16), which he obviously based on the offer extended to everyone in John 3:16.

Caveman

He overcomes the elects’ rebellion. He overcomes their resistance. He conquers them and makes them his own.

However, Piper sanctimoniously asserts that there is an infinitely greater love than John 3:16, a love that does not need to be offered to his chosen ones because He overcomes their rebellion and resistance; He conquers them and makes them his own, without them having to put their faith in Him for their salvation.

Could it be that God didn’t know how to overcome Adam and Eve’s rebellion and resistance, and how to conquer them and ever so gently bend their wills to comply with his will, and only learned to do so throughout the centuries that followed? Or, could it be that He only learned to overcome the rebellion and resistance of his elect when John Calvin unearthed the deep mysteries of election and predestination?

Piper appeals to three passages in Scripture to verify his statement that God’s love for his own is magnificently greater than the love in John 3:16.

The fact is that God, in the very next verse (verse 16) of Deuteronomy 10, commanded the Israelite to circumcise the foreskins of their hearts, and to cease their stiffneckedness (rebellion, obstinacy, hardheartedness, and pigheadedness). Don’t you think it was rather odd for God to command them to stop their rebellion and their resistance, if He unilaterally could overcome and conquer their rebellion and resistance?

Did God unilaterally conquer the moon worshiper, Abram, whom He later called Abraham? Or was it Abraham’s faith that was accounted to him for righteousness? (Galatians 3:6).

King Solomon, must have agonized, to the point of death and cried out many times: “Oh God, when are you going to overcome and conquer my rebellion, my resistance and my abominable idolatry? I cannot tolerate the idolatry my many wives and concubines have duped me into following their gods, any longer. Please, overcome and conquer me.”

I can only imagine what Piper’s fiancé would have thought, when he proposed to marry her and said: “This is not an offer you can refuse.

I demand and I claim you for myself, regardless of what you think or may say. I am unilaterally taking you for myself to be my wife.” John Piper believes that God sovereignly preordained the sins of every single human being. He predestined and ordained the sins of Herod, Judas and the Jewish rabble who shouted “crucify Him, crucify Him.”

But, unlike Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, King David and King Solomon, to name but a few, whom He overcame with his regenerative love, He decided not to overrule and overcome the sins of Herod and Judas Iscariot because they were not of the elect.

If God’s covenant love, election love, particular love, regenerative love, and monergistic love is majestically and magnificently far greater than God’s love in John 3:16, where He gave, offered, his only begotten Son to the entire human race, so that whosoever believes on Him shall receive eternal life, and if this covenant love is expressed in its most pristine way in the election of the nation of Israel, then we ought to ask some serious questions.

  1. Why will the children of the Kingdom (the majority of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob whose resistance and rebellion God had overcome and conquered and made them his own) be cast into hell? (Matthew 8:12).
  2. If the majority of the Jewish nation has rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah, and as a consequence their eyes have been blinded to the Truth so that they may not see, (Romans 11:10), why is the entire nation of Israel still called God’s elect? (Romans 11:28).

If God’s love for the people of Israel was his highest form of love – a love magnificently far greater than his love in John 3:16 – why is the majority of his people going to be cast into hell? Is it because He failed to overcome and conquer their hideous rebellion, idolatry, waywardness and sinfulness? I don’t think so, because the Bible clearly states that it was their unbelief that prevented them from entering God’s rest.

“And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. (Hebrews 3 verses 18 – 19).

This is precisely what John 3 verses 16 to 18 tells us. “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” There is absolutely no difference between God’s alleged greater love for his people (the Jews) and his love in John 3:16.

His love in both cases is exactly the same, and the way to benefit eternally from this love is simply to believe on his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ.  For that reason, Piper’s effort to prove that God’s love for the elect is magnificently far greater than his love, expressed in the crucifixion of his Son, in John 3:16, is not only wrong, but blasphemous to the extreme. God shows no partiality in his love for all people.

These are classic examples of the believing ones, to whom James White refers, for whom Christ came to the world because “the Father did not give the Son for any other reason than for those in regard to those who believe. That’s why the Son is given.”

Think of it, Spurgeon’s faith in God’s Sovereign Grace was so overwhelming that he believed it was God’s restraining power – a power He did not wield, to restrain Adam and Eve from sinning – that kept him free from acting in the horrendous sinful way the worst characters in the street were guilty of. How do you think Jesus would have compared Spurgeon to the woman of whom He once said:

“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” (Luke 7:47).

Could it be, that Jesus restrained Spurgeon from sinning like the scum on the streets (and this woman) because He wanted him to love Him less?

Perhaps Spurgeon’s heart should have burst forth in tears of gratitude, for rather not having been restrained from sinning, and sinned much, much more than the woman so that his love for Christ could abound in greater depths. In fact, Jesus did him a great disservice when He restrained Spurgeon from sinning like the scoundrels in the street and the woman in Luke 7:47.

Listen carefully to James White’s testimony of how he was saved in an interview conducted by  Romel Ghossain of Christian Media Productions.

The Bible never says that we should ask people when they became a Christian. Most people, among them the John MacArthurs, will tell you they’ve always been a Christian or they’ve always been a believer. This is a sure sign that they have never been saved, because no-one has always been a Christian or a believer.

At any rate, the devils also have always been believers and they tremble (James 2:19). The only difference between those who say they have always believed and the demons is that they don’t tremble like the demons. They seem to have more chutzpah than the demons. The hope of which we are told, we should testify to when asked (1 Peter 3:15), has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity.

The Hope in you is Christ crucified and Him risen from the dead – not Christianity. Roman Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, et al, are all Christians but are they saved? Similarly, Calvinists are all Christians but are they saved? James White begins by saying,

“Well, the Lord was gracious to me at a very young age. I was raised in a Christian family and it is a privilege to have that kind of upbringing. My first memories are of sermons, church services, Bible teaching. One of the first things I remember was my little child Bible, a precious possession. So at a very young age I remember RECOGNIZING the need of a Saviour.”

STOP! Stop right here. This is completely incompatible with what Calvinism teaches. Firstly, no one can recognize that he needs a Saviour without the conviction of the Holy Spirit – of sin, righteousness and judgment,  “Of sin, because they believe not on me,” Jesus said. How does the Holy Spirit convict lost sinners? Paul says, through the preaching of the Word and man’s response in faith to what he has heard. And yet, James White wrote in his book “The Potter’s Freedom, page  101,

“The Reformed assertion is that man cannot understand and embrace the gospel, nor respond in faith and repentance toward Christ, without God first freeing him from sin and giving him spiritual life (regeneration).”

Yet he boldly states that as a child he recognized (understood) that he needed a Saviour. Did he, at that moment when he recognized that he needed a Saviour, respond to the Gospel he heard and in faith received Jesus Christ as his Saviour? No, of course not, because his recognizing (understanding) that he needed a Saviour became a reality for him, only AFTER, he had been monergistically regenerated.

He was first regenerated by a sovereign act of God and only then, did he realize he needed a Saviour.

Don’t be mistaken by their forceful defense of their view of God’s righteousness. According to them, God is sovereignly righteous when He randomly chooses whomsoever He wills to save and whomsoever He wills to damn.

They call this righteousness but it is in fact UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, and it is this unrighteousness, clothed in the guise of righteousness which they revel in, in the most superlative fashion. It’s as Paul said, they refuse to adhere to, trust in, and rely on the Truth, but instead took pleasure in unrighteousness. What does their brand of unrighteousness look like?

The very first thing they toss at you whenever you vent your anger against their preference for unrighteousness is the following.

The fact that some receive from God the gift of faith within time, and that others do not, stems from his eternal decision. For all his works are known to God from eternity (Acts 15:18; Ephesians 1:11).

In accordance with this decision, he graciously softens the hearts, however hard, of his chosen ones and inclines them to believe, but , by his just judgment he leaves in their wickedness and hardness of heart, those who have not been chosen.

And in this, especially, is disclosed to us his act, unfathomable, and as merciful as it is just, of distinguishing between people equally lost. This is the well-known decision of election and reprobation revealed in God’s Word. This decision the wicked, impure, and unstable distort to their own ruin, but it provides holy and godly souls with comfort beyond words. (Article 6: God’s Eternal Decision (Canons of Dortrecht).

What kind of righteousness is this? First they say that God sovereignly does not soften the hearts of the reprobate and does not incline them to believe as He does the elect, and then that the wicked, the impure and the unstable distort the doctrine of election and predestination to their own ruin.

In other words, the reprobate wicked are themselves to blame for God’s sovereign choice not to soften their hearts and to incline them to believe the Gospel because they have rejected God’s sovereign choice not to soften their hearts and incline them to believe the Gospel. Is this what they call righteousness and justice?

They are the ones who distort God’s righteousness and, in effect, take pleasure in gross unrighteousness. Could there be any other deception as dangerous and destructive as this? May God have mercy on their pitiful souls.

The Bible warns:

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)

 Are you prepared to follow these men and their abominable teaching? 

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (Revelation 18:4)

More...

207 comments to Calvinism, The Greatest God-Sent Delusion of all Time

  • Andy

    Well defined article. Well done.

    I had a debate with a calvinist recently, they claimed to not be a “radical calvinist”, but you will find that there is ZERO difference between the “normal” calvinist and the “radical” calvinist. They both believe that God arbitrarily sends people to hell, and there’s nothing the people can do about it.

    So I explained to him, that the majority of people, when they hear teaching, they try to apply it to their lives. That is only natural.

    So I said to him, let’s look at this, “God sends people to hell” thing. Imagine you are putting your four young children to bed at night. You read them a Bible story, you pray with them, you tell them the right way to go, and you kiss them and tuck them in. Earlier in the day, you heard some wacko calvinistic teacher explain how God arbitrarily sends people to hell, and there’s nothing they can do about it.

    As you watch your little ones sleeping, you have to consider the possibility that God chose some or all of them for hell. You have to consider that possibility. After all, if calvinism were true, then that is a valid application of the teaching.

    You despair knowing that your love for them will be broken by an arbitrary decision of God that they could not change. Your teaching of them will be wasted if they can’t believe anyway, by God’s forced hand stopping them from believing.

    Well needless to say, he was “offended” by the illustration. But then went on to quote more from Calvin’s institutes.

    What can you do?

  • Andy,

    Why are they offended? Well, it’s as I said, their eyes are blinded to the truth according to 2 Thess 2:12.

  • Hester

    This is one big mess isn’t it. While I was reading this the thought suddenly struck me that thus according to the Calvinistic point of view, God loves those whom he regenerated but until that time He must hate them because He hates sinners. We don’t all come to salvation at a young age. There are some whom have gone to jail for murder or drug trafficking when they only meet the Lord and then only turn their lives around. So all those years God hated them but because they were “chosen” He loves them after their conversion. Sigh….
    Something else, I had a conversation with a friend in this week whose 5 year old daughter accepted the Lord as her Saviour and he mentioned that even in this little 5 year old there was a change of heart. So how is it possible that JMac “when God did His saving work in my heart, it was not discernible to me.”? When this little 5-year old knows the love of Christ has made her ‘different’.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I know that you re strongly against election but to use 2 Thess chapter 2 as a platform against it is incorrect. The context and timing of the “delusion sent by God” is clearly eschatological. The context is very easy to see by reading the chapter from the beginning.Though I disagree with you on election I have to say that I love the zeal you have for the Saviour.

  • Joe wrote:

    Thomas, I know that you re strongly against election but to use 2 Thess chapter 2 as a platform against it is incorrect. The context and timing of the “delusion sent by God” is clearly eschatological. The context is very easy to see by reading the chapter from the beginning.Though I disagree with you on election I have to say that I love the zeal you have for the Saviour.

    Surely, the doctrine of salvation is not limited to eschatology? Paul distinctly says that God sends a strong delusion upon those who “received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.” Calvinism in toto is a rejection of God’s doctrine of salvation. Calvinism in toto amounts to “But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.” (Matthew 23:13).

    I prefer to have a zeal for My Saviour than for election unto salvation which is a lie.

  • Joe

    Thomas, thank you for the response. The delusion that God sends the people in 2 Thess 2 is clearly the delusion that the people of that age will believe that the “lawless one” is indeed God. The church will be raptured by that stage so it is incorrect to apply that to the current time.The context is easy to follow from verse 1. Furthermore to say that those who believe in election believe that the lawless one is God in this current age is an impossibility for the “lawless one” is still to be revealed.

  • Joe,

    Can’t you see that Paul refers to anyone who “received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved?” His reference to the lawless one does not cancel out his reference to the rejection of the Gospel in this present age. Is his indictment in Galatians 1:8-9 also an eschatololgical utterance? God’s truth in regard to salvation is truncated for us in John 3:16, and as I indicated in my article, every single Calvinist rejects the truth therein, that they might be saved. They are twisting the truth therein to their own destruction.

  • Joe

    Thomas I appreciate your interaction. If you had used Galatians 1 as the passage to launch this post from I would accept that more readily because it certainly was written to the church.However there is absolutely no way that you can fit election into the 2 Thess 2 passage since it marks a time that the church will not see.The eschatology in that passage is not general in its future chronology but specific to the appearing of the lawless one.Only the unbelievers at that particular point will be sent a God delusion.Sorry but it is the wrong passage to use especially if you claim to be premil and pretrib.

  • Joe,

    I am not fitting election into 2 Thessalonians 2. I am fitting false doctrine into it because election unto salvation is a false doctrine and as such it is a strong delusion sent of God because its adherents have shunned the truth concerning the true way of salvation. Election unto salvation is as much a heresy as any other, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Roman Catholicism, and Seventh Day Adventism. Do they also not fit into 2 Thessalonians 2? Heresy is not limited to the appearing of the lawless one. The spirit of the lawless one has been around since the beginning of time.

  • Joe

    Thomas thank you once again for responding. You are dodging the issue. The issue is simply that you say that election is a God sent delusion, using a passage that clearly says that believing that the “lawless one” is God, is the God sent delusion. 2 Thess 2 does not say that believing election or any other heresy for that matter is the God sent delusion. It says that during the tribulation period that God will send the delusion and not during the church age.In other words the God sent delusion of 2 Thess 2 is not for today. You have got it wrong, just admit it.

  • Joe,

    You really don’t have to thank me for responding every time. You are the one who is dodging the issue. God’s judgment on those who disbelieve passages like John 3:16 and willfully twist it to change its true meaning is not limited to the tribulation. These principles of God’s judgment apply in all ages and can be seen in the 20th century. And with that I close my case.

  • Joe

    Thomas I am just being appreciative of the amount of time it takes you to put the posts together as well as answering the people who comment to the posts. You do not need to answer this.
    You may well close your case since you do not want to admit your mistake in carrying out clear eisegesis (contextual, eschatalogical) with the text of 2 Thess 2. The subject of the post and 2 Thess 2 have zero to do with each other and you know it, and so will anyone reading the text from verse 1 with any basic understanding of English.

  • Joe,

    So, when anyone distorts the Gospel of God before the tribulation, God’s judgment of a strong delusion does not apply to 2 Thess. 2 but as soon as the tribulation begins (whenever that may be), God’s judgment of a strong delusion suddenly kicks in and 2 Thess. 2 becomes effective? You seem to be saying, it’s OK to distort and twist God’s Gospel because God will not judge you as He is going to judge people in the tribulation. God has been judging false teachers and apostles throughout the centuries since the beginning of time, by putting lying spirits in their mouths. Read 1 Kings 22. Here God was determined to judge King Ahab because of his idolatry and disobedience and hence sent a lying spirit to mislead him. The same principle applies: If you adamantly and obstinately refuse to believe the Gospel so as to be saved, God will send you a lying spirit so that you may continue to believe heresy. It is all part of God’s judgments on you and your heresies. That’s precisely what happened to Pharaoh. He persistently hardened his own heart and eventually God assisted Him in the hardening of his heart so that He may judge him and his idolatry.

    Do you really think God is partial in his righteous judgments? He won’t judge those who disbelieve the Gospel (John 3:16) before the tribulation but as soon as the tribulation begins – boy oh boy, are you in for trouble then. Then, and only then, will He judge you for not believing the Gospel and send you a strong delusion so that you may believe a lie.

  • Hans

    Joe said:However there is absolutely no way that you can fit election into the 2 Thess 2 passage since it marks a time that the church will not see.The eschatology in that passage is not general in its future chronology but specific to the appearing of the lawless one.>> Does the church not see false signs and wonders already? Is the spirit of antichrist not at work already? 1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. The antichrist shall come, but even now there are many antichrists. God’s delution to those that do not love Him shall come, but it also is already here, and Calvinism most surely are one of them.
    2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. (The mystery of iniquity doth already work, even in Paul’s day)

  • Victor

    Oh shame the devil and tell the truth you liar. None of what you said about Calvinisn is the trut.

  • Victor,

    Oh shame the devil and tell the truth you liar. None of what you said about Calvinisn is the trut.

    What I wrote about Calvinism may not be the “trut” but it is definitely the truth.

  • Joe

    Hans with all due respect your logic is incorrect trying to take the step from the 1 John passage to the 2 Thess 2 passage. The many antichrists in 1 John are clearly purveyors of an incipient gnostic error known as Docetism. 1 John 2v19 clearly tells you that they were a specific people that had gone out from the church so that people could know who they were. Since the text of 1 John does not mention any God sent delusion you cannot just read it into the text. 2 Thess 2 also deals with a specific group of people who will believe that the Antichrist is God. God will send those specific people a delusion to reinforce their belief in the Antichrist being God. Unless you can tell me differently, the Antichrist has not been revealed so that text cannot apply to the current age since it is future.
    Lastly, convoluting texts leads to an inconsistent dispensationalism.

  • Joe, you are waffling and it is getting you nowhere very fast. Any error, whether, Gnosticism, Docetism, or any other heresy, originates with the spirit of Antichrist (which is the devil himself). His main purpose, with all these heresies, is to keep sinners away from the Gospel of Jesus Christ so that they may not be saved. So, if it is Satan who blinds peoples’ eyes and deludes them into believing that which is false, why does Paul say it is God who sends the delusion? Although it is Satan who perpetrates the delusion, it is God who sends the delusion. Satan can do nothing without God’s permission. The book of Job testifies to this. You are accusing God of being partial by asserting that the God-sent delusion applies only to the tribulation. Walfoord and Zuck says:

    “God desires that all be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4-6). But when people refuse to entertain the truth, He lets them pursue and experience the consequences of falsehood (cf. Romans 1:18-25). In fact, God, as the Judge of men, begin this judgment at the moment of their rebellion and subjects them to powerful delusion (energeian planes) which comes from choosing error over truth. They choose to believe the lie and God sends them the delusion that is inherent in their choice. This powerful judgment from God is justified by the unbelievers’ decision to refuse the truth. “The lie” is the claim that the man of lawlessness is God . . .

    This consequence befalls everyone who disbelieves the Gospel. Paul’s primary concern here is of course unbelievers who will be living when the man of sin will be revealed. But these principles of God’s judgment apply in all ages and can be seen in the 20th Century.”

  • Joe

    Thomas, I am certainly not waffling. I have addressed the text in its proper context. Please show me exegetically where I am waffling regarding 2 Thess 2. You cannot, if you are honest or have any basic understanding of Biblical hermeneutics. You have taken a text that clearly states a future event, and what the God sent delusion is, and applied general delusion to it. That is called committing eisegesis. If you thing that being exegetically sound is waffling then I am guilty as charged.

  • Joe

    Thomas you say, “Although it is Satan who perpetrates the delusion, it is God who sends the delusion. Satan can do nothing without God’s permission.” Let me ask you this, once God has sent a delusion to a person, can that person believe in the cross of Christ? Obviously not. So then why do you give everyone the gospel, perhaps God has deluded some? So very much like the Calvinists which you hate, you believe that there are a huge bunch of God deluded people that cannot believe but yet you give them the gospel in the hope that God will save them…
    Let me give you a parallel statement of what you have just written, “Although it is man who chooses God, it is God who empowers man to choose Him. Man can do nothing without God’s intervention”.
    Thomas, thank you for the time and interaction.

  • Joe,

    Thomas you say, “Although it is Satan who perpetrates the delusion, it is God who sends the delusion. Satan can do nothing without God’s permission.” Let me ask you this, once God has sent a delusion to a person, can that person believe in the cross of Christ? Obviously not. So then why do you give everyone the gospel, perhaps God has deluded some? So very much like the Calvinists which you hate, you believe that there are a huge bunch of God deluded people that cannot believe but yet you give them the gospel in the hope that God will save them…
    Let me give you a parallel statement of what you have just written, “Although it is man who chooses God, it is God who empowers man to choose Him. Man can do nothing without God’s intervention”.
    Thomas, thank you for the time and interaction.

    Like all Calvinists you seem to know only the word “hate” and not “love.” What would you do if you saw your kid following friends who lead a life of destruction? You have no right to put words in my mouth, suggesting that I hate Calvinists. The fact is that Calvinists hate non-Calvinists. Not only that, they see it as their duty to hate them. They themselves admit it. I am sure you will take every possible avenue at your disposal to bring your kid to his senses and convince him not to follow his friends. If you fail to do so, you don’t love your kid. Have you never read James 5:20

    let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.

    God often sends deluded false teachers among his children to test their love for Him.

    “If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear Him, and keep His commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him. 5 But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has spoken in order to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of bondage, to entice you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall put away the evil from your midst.” (Deut. 13:1-5).

    I never said that those who are deluded cannot believe. There is a vast difference between plain unbelief and exchanging the truth with something else and saying “this is the truth” when in fact it is a lie. Let me repeat what Walfoord and Zuck said:

    They choose to believe the lie and God sends them the delusion that is inherent in their choice.

    To be deluded means not only to believe a lie but to believe a lie while thinking it is the truth. So, those who believe a lie concerning the Gospel are made to think it is the truth. This is the delusion God sends.

    You wrote:

    Let me give you a parallel statement of what you have just written, “Although it is man who chooses God, it is God who empowers man to choose Him. Man can do nothing without God’s intervention”.

    “Although is is man who chooses God . . . .” It is obvious from Deut. 3:19 that man is able to make such a choice.

    “. . . it is God who empowers man to choose Him.” Well of course this is also true because God made man in his image which includes the power of choice.

    “Man can do nothing without God’s intervention.” This too is true because the entire Gospel is an intervention of God. Had He not intervened by sending his Son in the likeness of man, had He not suffered and died on his behalf, and been raised from the dead, man’s choice to choose God would have been null and void. There would not have been any basis for choosing God.

  • Joe,

    You certainly are waffling to the extent that you are beginning to believe a lie to be the truth. Beware of a delusion.

    What you are saying is that its OK to reject the Gospel, believe a lie and think it is the truth this side of the tribulation. But, it’s not kosher to do so in the tribulation. Then you’ve had it. What makes them worse than those who are doing it now? You are inconsistent in your arguments.

  • Joe

    Thomas, thank you for your response. I never said that it is OK to reject the gospel this side of the tribulation. What I said is that the delusion sent by God in 2 Thess 2 is future specific and fatal to the receiver thereof. There is no return to God for the God-deluded unbeliever who believes antichrist is God in 2 Thess 2. That is why the general delusion of this age cannot be compared to the one of 2 Thess 2. Unbelievers in this age can certainly be saved.
    Thomas though I differ with you on the subject of Soteriology I do not hate you. I love you for believing that you are a sinner who needs the cross of the Saviour. That makes you an adopted son of God and so you are my brother. I myself trust only upon the beautiful Jesus for my redemption. The difference is not that either of us do not believe that there is only one name by which we can be saved. The difference is how do we get to the point of putting our trust in Christ alone.

  • Joe,

    Election unto salvation is not biblical soteriololgy. It is a downright lie.

  • Joe

    Thomas that is your mantra. Do you believe that there are “Calvinists” who are saved? Are you not even going to mention that I have conclusively shown you that 2 Thess 2 cannot be used in the context you have used it regarding election in this age? Thank you for the interaction.

  • Joe,

    What is a delusion and who sends it, THIS SIDE OF THE TRIBULATION?

    If you believe that you are saved because you are an elect, you are deceived. You wrongfully believe a lie to be truth. That is the epitome of delusion – to believe that something is true when it is a lie. You have said nothing about MacArthur’s and Spurgeon’s testimonies. Are they the testimonies of true believers or do they sound more like the testimony of the Pharisee than that of the publican? God is still very much in the business of hardening rebellious peoples’ hearts. If anyone refuses to accept his truth regarding the Gospel of salvation, He will send you a delusion and you WILL believe that your lie is the truth, whether you are living this side of the tribulation or smack bang in the middle of it. The doctrine of election unto salvation is a very dangerous doctrine because it sounds so good. It sounds like the true Gospel but is indeed not. It is a false doctrine, leading many astray right into the jaws of hell. Proverbs 14:12.

  • Joe

    Thomas I frankly cannot comment on other men’s salvation. I did not take issue with your aim at election in the post although I disagree with you. I do not have a problem that God’s wrath is being poured out against unrighteousness as per Romans. I took issue with the incorrect use of 2 Thess 2’s God sent delusion being used in this age. You cannot use it for today. As I mentioned before the delusion of 2 Thess 2 is a condemnation unto judgement. There is no way back for those who believe antichrist is God.
    As far as I know, Calvinists do not believe that antichrist is God since he has not been revealed.

  • Joe,

    Calvinists may not believe that antichrist is God but they do believe in a different Gospel and another Jesus. As such they are following the spirit of antichrist (the devil) who is going to energise the embodiment of himself in the tribulation. What’s the difference?

    Would you say that the testimony of the Pharisee in Luke 18 was from God? If not, then you have every right to comment on his testimony. But then again, you don’t have to because Luke comments on it so perfectly.

    “I tell you, this man (the Publican) went down to his house justified rather than the other (the Pharisee);” (Luke 18:14)

    Why can’t you comment on MacArthur’s and Spurgeon’s testimonies? Are you saying you don’t know whether they are the elect?

  • Joe

    Thomas thank you for answering an earlier question I asked. By saying that “calvinists believe in a different Gospel and another Jesus” you are asserting that those who believe in election cannot be saved. By that I have to understand that every time you answer to something I write you are answering an unbeliever. Am I correct? You have taken the judgement seat of God and applied the 2 Thess 2 delusion to all those who believe in election and that they are headed for eternal damnation with no possible return since they have already believed that antichrist is God.
    You are welcome to believe that since I know upon Whom I have believed and it certainly is not the antichrist.
    In the meanwhile can you please show this “unbeliever” that you are not like my supposed father who is the father of lies and just act like your Father who is definitely truth and admit that the context relating to the God sent delusion of 2 Thess 2 cannot fit your post which says that the delusion of 2 Thess 2 is for calvinists today.

  • Joe,

    Would you mind giving your testimony?

    You say you know Whom you have believed. In the doctrines of grace (TULIP, election, predestination unto salvation) faith is taboo. I am talking about faith of your own accord as a precondition for salvation. In fact, anyone who testifies that he knows Whom he believed cannot be saved because they are basing their salvation on their own free-will which is idolatry. Therefore, it is not I who say you are an unbeliever. Your own brethren in the Calvinistic fold (election unto salvation brethren) are telling you that you are an unbeliever.

    What do YOU mean when you say you KNOW Whom you have believed? The devils also believe and they tremble. It is not whether you believe but what and how you believe that saves. That is why Jesus said: “If you believe as the Scriptures hath said.” The adherents to the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP, election, predestination unto salvation) definitely do not believe as the Scriptures hath said. Do you, for instance, believe that God hates sinners and that it is wrong to say God hates the sin but loves the sinner? Anyone who misrepresents God puts a question mark behind his salvation. Why do I say that? Well, Jesus Himself said that you cannot misrepresent God and still say that you are saved.

    (Joh 17:3) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

    If you say you KNOW Him, then you cannot possibly believe in election unto salvation because it maligns his very character which is love (1 John 4:8,16). He is the very essence of love. The doctrine of election unto salvation is a gross misrepresentation of God and his Son, Jesus Christ. Do you agree with the dudes I mentioned in my article that God loves the elect and hates the non-elect or that he loves them all but not in the same way? If so then I would advise you to look at –

    (2Co 13:5) Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

    Would you say that following the spirit of Antichrist is the very same as following the embodiment of Antichrist?

  • Joe

    Thomas, I trusted upon Jesus’ work on the cross long before I knew about or believed in election. Indeed I was very much like you regarding soteriology and fought against election for years. I hated the very concept. I believe that a large amount of Calvinists fall into the same boat as I do. So you see your constant repetition that to believe in election has to preclude faith is not true at all. Whilst I believed that I chose God my faith was real in your eyes. The minute that I believed that the reason I had chosen God was actually due to His working then my faith became false in your eyes.

    You see, humans would like to take credit for something in choosing God, even whilst denying that they had anything to do with it. What was the special something in you Thomas that made you believe in God unlike all the perishing unbelievers. Was there something more noble about you than them? There must be, though you will deny it till the last. You rose above the dregs of fallen humanity and believed upon God. Well done to you. Dream on.

    Furthermore you state that Calvinists believe that those who do not believe in election cannot be saved. There may be some bitter,fringe cavinistic lunatics who claim that but generally Calvinists know that all believers including themselves put their faith in Christ to be saved. There is no other way.

    Back to the real issue at hand. You say, “Would you say that following the spirit of Antichrist is the very same as following the embodiment of Antichrist?” Not in the case of 2 Thess 2. In 2 Thess 2 believing that Antichrist is God results in God sending a delusion for certain damnation. In the current age all unbelievers follow the spirit of Antichrist but their delusion is not unto certain damnation. How many times do I need to point out your error in the use of 2 Thess 2 that is time and event specific for your deluded calvinist post? You made a mistake, it is not a crime.

  • Joe wrote:

    According to your testimony there were two occasions on which you believed for your salvation. The first time when you believed in Jesus, which was, as you said, the time you hated the concept of election and the second when you believed in election. When would you say were you certain that if you died then you would go to heaven – the first or the second time?

  • Joe

    Thomas, I did not give my testimony. I also did not say that I believed upon Him on two different occasions. I said that I trusted in God’s finished work on the cross before I understood election. I have trusted Him since then. You cannot accept that there are many people out there that put their faith in God before believing in election. That undermines your argument that Calvinists trust in their election rather than Jesus for salvation and you cannot abide by that. In like manner you refuse to admit that you have used the future deadly God sent delusion of 2 Thess 2 in an incorrect way by applying it to calvinists today. By the way where can I read the article that says that election is not unto salvation but unto service I think you said?

  • Joe,

    If that wasn’t your testimony, what is your testimony? I asked you for your testimony? Don’t you want to give it?

  • Joe wrote:

    You cannot accept that there are many people out there that put their faith in God before believing in election.

    OK, let’s try again. Would you say that they were saved the moment they put their trust in Jesus and his finished work on the cross or were they saved the moment they believed in election?”

  • Joe wrote,

    By the way where can I read the article that says that election is not unto salvation but unto service I think you said?

    I quoted to you Romans 11:28 which clearly states that the entire nation of Israel is God’s elect despite the fact that they are enemies of the cross. Therefore, election cannot be unto salvation and therefore must be unto service. Put on your thinking cap, my friend and try to think logically a wee bit.

  • Joe

    I believe that I answered that in saying that the they put their faith in God before believing in election. Obviously they are saved at the moment which they put their trust in Christ’s finished work on the cross. Do they then become “unsaved” because they later believe in God’s elective work?
    Thomas you said, “Put on your thinking cap, my friend and try to think logically a wee bit.” Shall I do that in the same manner which you have regarding the dishonest use of 2 Thess 2?

  • Joe

    Thomas the only thing you said to me in an earlier post was, “Joe, Election unto salvation is not biblical soteriololgy. It is a downright lie.” If that is a paraphrase of Romans 11:28 then it is a really poor one. If it isn’t then why accuse me of not thinking logically?

  • Joe,

    What’s the point in putting their faith in election when they had already been saved when they put their faith in Jesus Christ? Do you need anything else than that in order to be saved? It proves without a shadow of doubt that election unto salvation is a myth and completely worthless. It means nothing. Indeed, is proves that it is a lie from the pit of hell. What you are teaching is Jesus + election. That’s dangerous, very dangerous.

    At any rate, those who believe in election unto salvation assert that man is completely unable to exercise faith in order to be saved. This allegedly false kind of faith supposedly overrides and nullifies God’s sovereignty. The elect, they say, must first be regenerated before they can receive faith as a gift from God. Consequently, they say that the salvation of those who put their faith in Jesus before they believed in election is false. You are right, and I agree, those who later believe in election after they had put their faith in Jesus Christ remain saved. They do not lose their salvation. However, they have been deceived and it affects very dangerously the way they present the Gospel. In stead of telling people how they were saved when they put their trust in Jesus Christ, they tell them to put their faith in election. This is very dangerous because it leads people astray. (Remember Galatians 1:8-9?).

    You don’t seem to understand Romans 11:28. So, there’s no point in debating it any further. I cannot debate persons who refuse to understand.

    You asked,

    “Do they then become “unsaved” because they later believe in God’s elective work?

    Although I have already stated that the switch from faith in Jesus to faith in election does not mean that anyone loses his salvation, I do however doubt whether they were genuinely saved the first time.

    It is rather odd for Calvinists to say that man is completely unable to put his faith in Jesus Christ but quite capable to put his faith in election.

    I think you should first study Calvinism (Doctrines of Grace, TULIP) more thoroughly before continuing this debate.

  • Joe,

    Jesus Himself is called God’s elect. Was He elected unto salvation or unto service?

    If the entire nation of Israel is God’s elect, and indeed they are, how can you come to the conclusion that the entire nation of Israel was elected unto salvation when most of them are going to hell?

  • Joe

    Thomas, I love the way you just dismiss me as an idiot. You believe that I am an intellectual midget in your mighty sight. You demean me regarding Romans 11 though I have not commented on it. Indeed you told me to start thinking clearly in the last post regarding Romans 11 though you had not quoted it to me during our exchanges.
    The text that brought this whole debate on is 2 Thess 2 and your exegetically flawed use of it in your post. I have conclusively shown that you were absolutely wrong in your application of that text. You, however refuse to admit that you were wrong, whilst telling me that I am incapable of understanding your advanced arguments.
    Don’t just throw out a verse and expect me to accept it in isolation. You did that in 2 Thess 2 which is an uncomplicated text to deal with, and messed up the context and timing of that text. To argue for your position in Romans 11:28 please give me the context of the verse which starts all the way back in chapter 9. Furthermore you have stated that Romans 11:28 proves that election is unto service . Is Romans 11:28 the entire and only Biblical data regarding election. It clearly is not.If you had just carried on one more verse into 2 Thess 2 instead of stopping at verse 12 which you used incorrectly you would find this in verse 13;

    2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

    Apparently Paul says that you can be chosen unto salvation in 2 Thess 2:13.

  • Joe,

    Are you blind? Romans 11:28 distinctly says that the entire nation of Israel is God’s elect. I cannot spell it out to you more clearly than that? Will every single elect Jew be saved?

    The context in 2 Thess 2 is the Rapture. As such, Paul is not addressing salvation from death to life through the forgiveness of your sins in verse 13. He speaks about the final salvation (rescue) of the saints at the Rapture. Haven’t you noticed that this salvation is through sanctification which will reach its ultimate culmination at the Rapture? Whenever Paul and the other apostles speak of salvation from death to eternal life, they refer to it as salvation through the blood of Christ and NOT through sanctification. The salvation through sanctification applies to the already saved only and therefore 2 Thess 2:13 cannot possibly refer to salvation from death to life.

    Why would God’s judgment on those who reject his Gospel of salvation suddenly change during the tribulation? If that should be the case He is not consistent in his judgments.

    I am not dismissing you as an idiot. That’s your perception. I am merely trying to encourage you to think logically. At the moment you are not.

  • Joe

    Thomas, thank you for the interaction. There are obviously two ways to look at 2 Thess 2:13. I believe both are valid but will happily concede that after looking at both angles I actually like yours more.
    I am pressed for time but will quickly address Romans 11:28. While Israel is an elect nation the scriptures clearly speak of the remnant of believers within it. Romans 9 leading up to Romans 11:28 tells us,”For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”. We also see the remnant in verse Romans 9:27 which also leads up to Romans 11:28.

    Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

    However that does not prove your argument because the actual remnant of believers in Israel are called the election in contradistinction to the majority that do not believe. So what we have is an elect nation comprising of a remnant of believers which are elect unto salvation while the rest are blinded or hardened. We can clearly see this in Romans 11:7 which actually gives context to Romans 11:28.

    Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

    Israel is elect and the remnant within it in contradistinction to the unbelievers is also elect.

  • Joe,

    I am pressed for time but will quickly address Romans 11:28. While Israel is an elect nation the scriptures clearly speak of the remnant of believers within it. Romans 9 leading up to Romans 11:28 tells us,”For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”. We also see the remnant in verse Romans 9:27 which also leads up to Romans 11:28.

    Your’s is an outdated argument that does not stand up to scrutiny. Paul does not only refer to a future remnant in Romans 11:28 but the entire nation of Israel who, because of their unbelief and rejection of their Messiah, have been judicially blinded. And yet, they have remained God’s elect through the ages. Why? Because “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” (verse 29). In fact, Paul says that Israel is God’s elect despite their rejection of the Gospel. Paul does not speak about a remnant but the entire nation of Israel.

    How you can come to the conclusion that Paul refers to a remnant of Israel and not the unbelieving bulk of the nation of Israel, only you will know. The remnant to which Paul refers will be the remaining Jews at the Second Advent of Jesus Christ. They will believe the Gospel. Verse 28 refers to unbelieving Jews who are enemies of the Gospel and yet are God’s elect. Paul also refers to the entire nation of Israel as the children of the kingdom. (Matthew 89:11-12). That’s just another way of saying they are the elect of God.

  • Joe

    Thomas thank you for the response. Please deal with Romans 11:7. You shot down my argument for the remnant without dealing with Romans 11:7 and the surrounding verses which clearly point to the remnant of Israel being elect in contradistinction to unbelieving Israel.

    Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

  • Joe,

    I don’t like double demanding posts trying to push me into a corner. So just patiently wait until I have the time to answer you. Or do you really think, “Ah, I have posted the double-punch knock-out blow.” Don’t be too sure about that.

    To determine whether Romans 11:7 refers to the remnant of Israel being the elect and the rest being the reprobate we must establish what comes first – faith or salvation. If salvation precedes faith then your assumption that only the remnant of Israel is God’s elect must be correct because the reformed view of faith is that it is a gift given only to the elect after they had been sovereignly and monergistically regenerated (Ephesians 2:8-9). However, should the view that faith is a necessary precondition for salvation be the correct one, then election cannot be ratified without the faith on the part of the elect. But before we go there, let us first see what the Old Testament says about Israel being God’s elect.

    For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me. (Isaiah 45:4)

    If that doesn’t open your election-unto-salvation oriented eyes, then nothing will. You will remain blind to the truth until you breath your last. Note carefully: God does not say in the very least “and the remnant of Israel mine elect.” Hopefully you can see that although I doubt it. Did He surname only a remnant or the entire nation of Israel? Furthermore, the verse very distinctly says that though they did not know Him, He surnamed them. The expression “surnamed them” is just another way of saying “He chose them.” Furthermore (and I assume you already know this) Jacob was the father of the twelve sons who made up the entire nation of Jacob (Israel). If that doesn’t open your election-unto-salvation oriented eyes, then nothing will. You will remain blind to the truth until you breath your last. Let us now return to Romans 11:7.

    First of all, Paul is dealing with the abhorrent doctrine of replacement theology. Many Gentile saints in those days, like many today, believed that God had cast away his elect nation (Israel). They believed that God had written Ichabod over them. No, says Paul, you are wrong. God forbid, God has not cast them off. (verse 1). They are being held on hold in judicial blindness so that the Gospel may be presented to the Gentiles (verses 10-12).

    Hopefully you have noticed verse 2 which says “God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew.” This is very important because it shows on what basis He chose only a remnant to inherit his salvific blessings. It simply means that He foreknew (not foreordained or predestined) those who would believe in Him and on that basis He chose them in Christ before the foundation of the world. To verify this we must turn to verses 19 to 22.

    Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of UNBELIEF they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. (Romans 11:19-22)

    And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. (Hebrews 3:18-19)

    It is NOT non-election that keeps you out of heaven but UNBELIEF.

    God did not randomly choose some and said “you and you and you are mine and you and you and you are not mine (remember Isaiah 45:4?). The reprobate among Israel chose not to trust Him and on the basis of their unbelief God chose not to elect them to inherit his salvific blessings. If this is true, which of course it is because Paul very distinctly says so, then God elected the remnant to inherit the blessings of his salvation on the basis of their faith.

    What about the hardening part? Well, here again we must turn to 2 Thessalonians 2. Anyone – Jew or Gentile – who hardens his own heart and refuses to believe and trust God WILL be assisted by Him and o He WILL harden his or her heart even further, not because He wants them to end up in hell but because they persist in their own hardness of heart.

  • Joe

    Thomas you are quite correct I do need to be patient. Thomas I agree that it is unbelief that keeps you out of heaven and not non-election. Most calvinists will agree with you. You cannot blame God for your unbelief but we can certainly rather give glory to God for His choice rather than ours. God chooses the elect because they first chose Him. In other words they are elect by their own choice?
    How do you view the “foreknowledge” of God?

  • Joe,

    Let’s get this straight and clarify how you view the Doctrines of grace. What do you think of TULIP?

    No one is elect by his own choice. You can’t tell lost sinners “Choose Jesus Christ and you will be saved.” Repent and BELIEVE the Gospel is the only way to be saved. They must get a grip on the Gospel (Good News) and believe it in order to be saved.

  • Joe

    Thomas I will try to be brief in my answer. In Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s book named God’s will and man’s will he says the following;

    The term “lapse” means “fall”; it focuses on the fall of man. The different lapsarian views depend upon how the decree to permit the Fall fits within the divine decree. How Calvinistic one is will determine where the lapse takes place.

    The Moderate Calvinistic view holds to sublapsarianism, which consists of five decrees. First, God decreed to create all men. Second came the lapse, the decree to allow the Fall. Third was the decree to provide salvation for all. Fourth was the decree to elect some and bypass the rest. And fifth was the decree to apply salvation to the elect when they believe, and salvation is applied only when they believe. That is why in this view, faith must precede salvation; faith precedes regeneration.

    With that background, the five points of Moderate Calvinism would be as follows:

    1. Total Depravity

    All three groups of Calvinism speak of “total depravity,” but they do not always define it the same way. But in the case of Moderate Calvinism, total depravity simply emphasizes that sin has touched every part of man.

    2. Unconditional Election

    “Unconditional” means God did not elect on the basis of foreseen faith. That was not the basis for election. Election was not based upon what God knew people would believe, but He simply elected the elect unconditionally.

    3. Unlimited Atonement

    This view of Calvinism holds to unlimited atonement. The Bible teaches that Yeshua died for all. He provided salvation for all.

    4. Irresistible Grace

    God’s salvation grace is irresistible and for that reason the elect will respond to this grace and choose to believe.

    5. Perseverance of the Saints

    Normally, those who hold to the Moderate Calvinism view prefer the expression “eternal security.” Why other Calvinists employ the term “perseverance of the saints” is because Calvinists like to work with an acronym based upon the flower called “tulip.” This view was developed in Holland and the tulip is the Dutch flower. Based upon that, they like to use the word “tulip” as an acronym to represent the five points of their view: “T” represents “total depravity;” “U” stands for “unconditional election;” “L” stands for limited atonement, “I” represents irresistible grace; and the “P” is the perseverance of the saints. In their view, they believe all saints will persevere to the end, never fall into carnality for any length of time.

    But Modern Calvinists prefer the term “eternal security” or “the perseverance of God.” God perseveres for the saints; the saints do not always persevere. This would be the middle ground that the author holds.

    This is the view I hold to. Obviously one can put a lot more meat on the bones of this summary.

  • Joe,

    I have one question for you. Do you believe that mankind as a whole has a free-will? Let’s make it two. Whenever you proclaim the Gospel do you ever use the words “election” or “unconditional election” in your presentation?

  • Joe,

    If Jesus died for everyone, what is it that keeps the majority out of heaven – non-election or self-willed unbelief?

    You cannot have “unlimited atonement” and “irresistible grace” side by side. Irresistible grace cancels out unlimited atonement.

    You cannot have irresistible grace if God’s atonement is unlimited because his atonement IS an act of grace.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I do not use the words “election” or “unconditional election” when proclaiming the gospel. “Election” is God’s domain, not man’s. I proclaim a gospel of repentance and man’s need to trust upon the finished work of the risen Jesus Christ on the cross. I do what God expects of me and I trust that God will give the increase as He sees fit.

    Self-willed unbelief is what keeps people out of heaven.

    God provides atonement for everyone but not everyone is saved. You seem to think that God is unfair if all do not get equal opportunity. The fact remains that many will die without even hearing a proper presentation of the gospel and thus be consigned to hell. Does that make God unfair? For your theory of God’s absolute impartiality in salvation to stand, then not only must man have a will apart from God, which is an impossibility if God is indeed omniscient, and furthermore every man must be presented with a clear and equal gospel message which does not happen either in reality. Those going to hell due to not receiving the gospel can then call God unfair.

  • Joe

    Thomas, my apologies for using my gmail account. It was unintentional. I see it has changed the little picture.

  • Joe,

    Thomas, I do not use the words “election” or “unconditional election” when proclaiming the gospel. “Election” is God’s domain, not man’s. I proclaim a gospel of repentance and man’s need to trust upon the finished work of the risen Jesus Christ on the cross. I do what God expects of me and I trust that God will give the increase as He sees fit.

    If election and in particular unconditional election is part and parcel of the Gospel (Good News) then you dare not omit it from your Gospel presentations.

    Self-willed unbelief is what keeps people out of heaven.

    If self-willed unbelief is what keeps people out of heaven, why do you blame God for it? Non-election places the onus on God; self-willed unbelief places it on the person.

    God provides atonement for everyone but not everyone is saved. You seem to think that God is unfair if all do not get equal opportunity. The fact remains that many will die without even hearing a proper presentation of the gospel and thus be consigned to hell. Does that make God unfair? For your theory of God’s absolute impartiality in salvation to stand, then not only must man have a will apart from God, which is an impossibility if God is indeed omniscient, and furthermore every man must be presented with a clear and equal gospel message which does not happen either in reality. Those going to hell due to not receiving the gospel can then call God unfair.

    Show me one verse in Scripture that says some people will never hear the Gospel? In fact, the Bible says the exact opposite. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. (Romans 1:18-19). Let’s assume there are still many who have not yet heard the Gospel. Don’t you think that should motivate you to pack your bags, get there as soon as possible and present the Gospel to them?

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Joe

    >> You said: “Thomas, I trusted upon Jesus’ work on the cross long before I knew about or believed in election. Indeed I was very much like you regarding soteriology and fought against election for years. I hated the very concept.”

    Do you think the Holy Spirit would give you a teaching that is detestable that you would hate for many years? No he wont. To me this sounds like something satan was giving you, the Holy Spirit made you hate it, detest it, but in the end you gave in and followed Satan’s teaching.

  • Joe

    Thomas, you said,”If election and in particular unconditional election is part and parcel of the Gospel (Good News) then you dare not omit it from your Gospel presentations.”
    As I said before, election is God’s domain not man’s. Man’s domain is to obey God by carrying out the great commission. I proclaim a gospel of repentance and man’s need to trust upon the finished work of the risen Jesus Christ on the cross. I do what God expects of me and I trust that God will give the increase as He sees fit.

    You said, “If self-willed unbelief is what keeps people out of heaven, why do you blame God for it? Non-election places the onus on God; self-willed unbelief places it on the person. “
    Where did I say that I blame God for keeping people out of heaven who have heard the gospel and in self-willed unbelief rejected it? It is certainly not God’s fault that they reject the gospel, it is their own doing. It is what they want to do.

    You also said, “Show me one verse in Scripture that says some people will never hear the Gospel? In fact, the Bible says the exact opposite. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. (Romans 1:18-19). “

    Romans 1:18-19 refers to the fact that there is a God. It is general revelation of the existence of God not the Gospel message. God has planted evidence of His existence in the very nature of man by reason and moral law. That is why man is without excuse in verse 20. God holds all men responsible for their refusal to acknowledge what He has shown them of Himself in His creation. No man knows the gospel message without being told what it is. That is why Romans 10:14 says;

    Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

    Although the innate knowledge in man of the existence of God is thorough, it does not contain the entire biblical revelation. It is enough to render man culpable, but it is not a saving knowledge. This means that this knowledge is sufficient to condemn everyone, but not sufficient to save anyone.

    We see the following in Romans 2:12;

    Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

    According to Romans 2:12, there are two kinds of sinners.Those condemned apart from the Law, and those condemned in it. It means that whether or not a person had the revelation of the Law of Moses or not, he was a sinner. Whether the person was an Israelite living under the Mosaic system, or a pagan living under his own moral or ethical system, man is a sinner. Romans 2:15 goes on to explain that those to whom the Law of Moses was never given, that is, those who are wholly ignorant of it, are still guilty of sin and their very consciences bear witness to this fact. They may not have the revelation of God’s specific Law as handed down to Moses on Mt. Sinai, but they are guilty of violating the moral and ethical expectations planted in their own hearts. Those living under the Law of Moses are sinners because they failed to keep that Law; those not living under the Law of Moses are sinners because they have failed to keep the Law written in their heart. Either way, all men have failed to live up to the Light that they have been given. We have all failed to abide by whatever sense of right and wrong we have been given, whether it be the written revelation of the Lord as recorded in His Word, or the sense of right and wrong which He has placed inside each one of us.

    Your theory of God’s absolute impartiality in salvation is based on a faulty assumption. Your faulty assumption is that our condemnation is based on a rejection of the gospel. Scripture teaches that our condemnation is based on the fact that we are sinners and die in our sins, not because at some point in time we rejected the gospel.

  • Joe

    Deborah you said, “Do you think the Holy Spirit would give you a teaching that is detestable that you would hate for many years? No he wont. To me this sounds like something satan was giving you, the Holy Spirit made you hate it, detest it, but in the end you gave in and followed Satan’s teaching.”

    That is your view. I would caution you to attribute things to Satan that could well be of the Holy Spirit.

  • Joe wrote,

    Thomas, you said,”If election and in particular unconditional election is part and parcel of the Gospel (Good News) then you dare not omit it from your Gospel presentations.”
    As I said before, election is God’s domain not man’s. Man’s domain is to obey God by carrying out the great commission. I proclaim a gospel of repentance and man’s need to trust upon the finished work of the risen Jesus Christ on the cross. I do what God expects of me and I trust that God will give the increase as He sees fit.

    You are not listening. You believe in unconditional election unto SALVATION, don’t you? Now, if Jesus was correct in saying that He came to this earth to seek and to SAVE lost sinners, then unconditional election UNTO SALVATION must be part and parcel of the Gospel and therefore not only God’s domain. That’s pure nonsense.

    I didn’t read the rest of your post. I refuse to waste my time any longer. Your arguments are self contradictory. However I did read your last sentence. It is ridiculous to say the least.

    Your theory of God’s absolute impartiality in salvation is based on a faulty assumption. Your faulty assumption is that our condemnation is based on a rejection of the gospel. Scripture teaches that our condemnation is based on the fact that we are sinners and die in our sins, not because at some point in time we rejected the gospel.

    Why do people die in their sins – because they are not elected or because they refuse to repent and believe the Gospel? Rejecting the Gospel is tantamount to rejecting Him. If so, then people go to hell because they reject the Gospel, the Good News that tells them how much God loves them and sent his Son to bear God’s wrath in their behalf because He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Have you never read 2 John verse 9?

    Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine (THE GOSPEL) of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ (THE GOSPEL), he hath both the Father and the Son.

    Unconditional election unto salvation is NOT the Gospel. It is a lie from the pit of hell and the sooner you realize it the better for you.

    I really don’t have time to argue with you whilst you present so many contradictory arguments.

  • Joe,

    Election unto salvation is definitely NOT from God. Therefore, I would caution you to attribute things to God that is not from Him.

  • Joe

    Thomas my arguments are not contradictory. I did not know that we were arguing.You do not have time to “argue” with me because you really do not have answers to what I have written. You know and I know that the impartiality that you demand of God is not Biblical. Furthermore your view of God’s omniscience is really open Theism in reality. You cannot change the core knowledge of God, that is a metaphysical impossibility. If you could then God would be changing His knowledge which would mean that He was not omniscient to begin with since He has added something to what He knows.
    Why don’t you write a post showing why election is not unto salvation?

  • Joe,

    Thomas, you said,”If election and in particular unconditional election is part and parcel of the Gospel (Good News) then you dare not omit it from your Gospel presentations.”
    As I said before, election is God’s domain not man’s. Man’s domain is to obey God by carrying out the great commission. I proclaim a gospel of repentance and man’s need to trust upon the finished work of the risen Jesus Christ on the cross. I do what God expects of me and I trust that God will give the increase as He sees fit.

    If election unto salvation is God’s exclusive domain and He ultimately chooses who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, what’s the point in preaching the Gospel? What would happen if no one proclaimed the Gospel? I assume you would still say the exact number of people He elected unto salvation before the foundation of the world shall be saved because He cannot fail in his domain.

    You said, “If self-willed unbelief is what keeps people out of heaven, why do you blame God for it? Non-election places the onus on God; self-willed unbelief places it on the person. “
    Where did I say that I blame God for keeping people out of heaven who have heard the gospel and in self-willed unbelief rejected it? It is certainly not God’s fault that they reject the gospel, it is their own doing. It is what they want to do.

    Who and what decides who goes to heaven? If God decides who goes to heaven and if his election is the means by which He decides who goes to heaven, then man has no say in the matter. Therefore, you don’t have to say in so many words that God is to blame for those whom He did not elect to go to heaven and hence are irresistibly bound for hell. You only have to suggest it and that’s precisely what you did. Election unto salvation places the onus on God, not man.

    Romans 1:18-19 refers to the fact that there is a God. It is general revelation of the existence of God not the Gospel message. God has planted evidence of His existence in the very nature of man by reason and moral law. That is why man is without excuse in verse 20. God holds all men responsible for their refusal to acknowledge what He has shown them of Himself in His creation. No man knows the gospel message without being told what it is. That is why Romans 10:14 says;

    Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

    Although the innate knowledge in man of the existence of God is thorough, it does not contain the entire biblical revelation. It is enough to render man culpable, but it is not a saving knowledge. This means that this knowledge is sufficient to condemn everyone, but not sufficient to save anyone.

    Romans 1 may not be a complete presentation of the Gospel but in essence merely a general revelation of God’s existence, but it surely is an introduction to the Gospel. Allow me to explain. Would you agree that every single human being knows or will know that God exists? You cannot deny it because God Himself says that no one is, or will be without excuse. Verse 20 implies that anyone can look up to the sky and come to the conclusion that there must be a supreme Being who made everything. In fact many ex-atheists and evolutionists have come to know God and his Christ by admitting that only a self-existent and transcendent supreme Being could have fined tuned the earth to be able to sustain life. This brings me to the crux of my argument (by the way, the word “argument” does not always mean to tussle. It most often means to make a statement) that Romans 1 is an introduction to the Gospel. The very first thing anyone should and can do when he is convinced that God exists, is to search Him out, to seek Him. This – to seek Him – is the very first step lost sinners ought to make when they’ve been convinced that God exists. Jeremiah 29:13 tells us that anyone who seeks God with all his heart shall find Him. He will then reveal Himself to the seeker and he will learn to know Him. You will recall that Jesus said eternal life is to know God and his Son whom He sent (John 17:3). So, the reasonable conclusion we may draw from this is that God reveals his existence to all mankind so that they may seek and find Him. A similar example is Acts 17:26-28, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” God’s supreme will and purpose for man is that he should seek Him with all his heart and He will make sure that he finds Him.”

    I once read a testimony of a man who lived in Romania where, as you know, Bibles were forbidden when Ceausescu ruled. The man happened to find a small torn piece from the Bible in a public toilet with these words written on it, “And God said.” He began to reason that if God can speak it follows that He exists. This prompted Him to call upon the Name of the Lord and begged Him to reveal Himself to Him (Romans 10:13). The rebels in Romans did not seek God but preferred to make for themselves idols. They knew that God exists but refused to acknowledge Him as the only true God. They rejected God whom they knew exists and therefore rejected his Gospel.

  • Joe,

    You haven’t answered my question.

    Why do people die in their sins – because they are not elected or because they refuse to repent and believe the Gospel? Rejecting the Gospel is tantamount to rejecting Him. If so, then people go to hell because they reject the Gospel, the Good News that tells them how much God loves them and sent his Son to bear God’s wrath in their behalf because He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Have you never read 2 John verse 9?

    Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine (THE GOSPEL) of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ (THE GOSPEL), he hath both the Father and the Son.

  • Joe

    Thomas, thank you very much for the interaction and I mean that. The amount of work you put into answering me is really appreciated. If you would like me to stop posting further on this post due to the amount of time I am taking up then I will be fine with that.
    People who hear the gospel and then die in their sins are to blame for refusing to repent and believe the gospel. People who die without hearing the gospel and die in their sins are to blame for not heeding to the existence of God though He has clearly put it into their hearts. It is what they desire in their broken state of sin. Their denial of God has nothing to do with election, it has to do with their sinful inclinations.God cannot be blamed for their choices but man cannot take glory or credit for God’s choices.

  • Joe wrote,

    God cannot be blamed for their choices but man cannot take glory or credit for God’s choices.

    How does man propose to take glory or credit for God’s choices?

  • Joe

    Thomas you asked, “How does man propose to take glory or credit for God’s choices?”
    Man proposes to take credit for choosing God when in fact God has chosen man.

  • Joe,

    Man has no free-will? I have already told you that salvation is not a matter of merely choosing God. If you think salvation simply means to choose God then you don’t know what salvation is.

  • Joe

    Thomas I know that you do not believe that salvation is man merely choosing God. In the same manner I do not believe that believing in election is what saves you.
    I gather that you feel that because man is an image bearer that he has a free will. To what degree do you believe that the will of man is free from the dictates of God?

  • Joe,

    If you mean by the dictates of God that He decreed some to everlasting life and others to everlasting destruction, then man has no free-will and is totally at the irresistible mercy or un-mercy of God for his final destination – heaven or hell.

    There is only a single dictate of God as far as salvation is concerned – repent and believe the Gospel. Anyone is able to repent and believe the Gospel. Therefore, there are no elect or non-elect. Everyone is equal in the sight of God and has an equal opportunity to be saved, dependent on each individuals attitude and response to the Gospel – receive it or reject it.

  • One of the most damnable heresies is that Christ did not suffer and die for all sinners, but only a miniscule handful. So you father ten children who wind up in a deep ravine but you choose to only let down the rope for one? And why does God have to send strong delusion to those who are totally depraved and cannot even know the truth?

  • Rick Frueh,

    The so-called elect who believe they have been chosen unto salvation before the foundation of the world are the deluded ones and not the non-elect.

  • Joe

    Rick , your analogy is really poor. You suggest that man would certainly save all ten of his children with the rope given the ability and thus so will God. The reality is that God does have the ability to save all men and yet it is very clear that He does not. If God’s “rope” is the gospel, and men know that not grasping it will keep them in the “ravine”, then why don’t all men grasp the “rope” of the gospel to get out of the “ravine”?
    It is obvious that your analogy fails dismally, because while men will certainly want to grasp at a literal rope to save their physical lives it is very clear that man in his sin is not quite as receptive to the “rope” of the gospel as you would like to suggest to save his soul. Why may I ask is this the case?

  • Joe

    Thomas this is the deluded one over here. Can God’s innate knowledge change? Can He either forget something or learn something?
    Where can I read a defense or article of not being chosen unto salvation?

  • Joe,

    What would your analogy look like? is it –

    The reality is that God does have the ability to save all men and yet it is very clear that He does not?”

    OR

    The reality is that God does have the ability to save all men and yet it is very clear that He does not WANT TO BECAUSE IT PLEASES AND GLORIFIES HIM?”

    You should try to be a little more honest in your rebuttals.

  • Joe,

    Thomas this is the deluded one over here. Can God’s innate knowledge change? Can He either forget something or learn something?
    Where can I read a defense or article of not being chosen unto salvation?

    In the Bible (God’s eternal Word). It does not defend the doctrine of “chosen unto salvation.” It abhors it. If you don’t have a Bible, I can send it to you soonest possible. Or are you one of those who “Ever [are] learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Tim 3:7)

  • Joe

    Thomas, take it as you like since it seems certain that you will. The fact of the matter is that the rope/ravine analogy is flawed and you know it. Instead of accusing me of dishonesty why don’t you just answer the following, “Can God’s innate knowledge change? Can He either forget something or learn something?”

    If the Bible truly abhors the chosen unto salvation doctrine then why do you not just present it and be done instead of demeaning me. It would be better if you presented your case since I may be one of those that don’t have the capacity to ever come to the truth.

  • Joe – Your correction excludes man’s free will.

  • Joe,

    Please get to the point with your ” “Can God’s innate knowledge change? Can He either forget something or learn something?”

  • Joe

    Thomas, I can get to the point once you answer the question.

    What about the article denying chosen unto salvation?

  • Joe wrote,

    What about the article denying chosen unto salvation?

    Your egg-dance is beginning to irritate me. What about the article? Be a little more specific.

  • Joe

    Thomas there is no need to be irritated. I think that you know what I am talking about. I could be mistaken so, where can I read it? Can you point me to such an article?

    As for the question, “Can God’s innate knowledge change? Can He either forget something or learn something?”. Please answer it I am trying to ascertain your view on God’s omniscience.

  • Joe.

    I referred you to the most reliable source to prove to you that election and predestination unto salvation does not exist. Why do you demand an article on the subject? Yes, there are passages in Scripture that mention predestination and election. However, we must evaluate those passages with other passages that refer to salvation, and election unto salvation contradicts these passages.

    I have never seen the words “innate knowledge” in Scripture. If you are referring to his omniscience, then, and I thought you already know this, He cannot learn something because He already knows everything and He has no need to learn anything because He already knows what there is to be learned. However, there are passages that seems to suggest that He chooses to forget sometimes.

    I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. (Isaiah 43:25)

  • Joe

    Thank you Thomas. Perhaps you can give me a few texts of scripture that point that way. I understand that you are working with a different set of hermeneutics to mine.

    I know that you believe in God’s omniscience. I never doubted it. The issue is this, if God’s knowledge cannot be added to or changed, then how can you be certain that the person you are giving the gospel to can definitely believe since he might be one of the people that God knows to have turned the gospel away? If God knows that the person you are giving the gospel to, will reject it, then that is what the person will do.

  • Joe,

    Your view has nothing to do with hermeneutics but with fatalism at its very best. In fact, your view corresponds to that of all Calvinists who believe that God has ordained, arranged, predetermined everything, even a secretary’s typing errors. She makes those errors “because that is what she will do” and no-one and nothing can stop her from making them.

    Her boss who hired her, did not know she was a divinely inspired error freak who constantly made mistakes and yet he hired her. But then she learns how to delete her errors and replace them with the correct words and spelling. Has she overruled God’s sovereign decree for her to make those mistakes and become liable for his righteous judgements? Or does He honour her free-will to correct her mistakes without Him having to punish her for having overruled his knowledge? God’s foreknowledge does not make people do things, for instance to accept or to reject the Gospel. It has no bearing on people’s final choices. Man does indeed have a free-will whether you like it or not.

    God foreknew that Adam and Eve would sin. However, his foreknowledge was not the decisive determinative factor that made them do what they had done. God also knew beforehand that the nation of Israel and most of the Gentiles would reject the Gospel and yet He commanded his disciples to preach the Gospel and earnestly contend for the faith.

    How many times did you hear the Gospel and not respond to it? Once, twice, a hundred times before you were saved? If God knew you will reject his Gospel, was it because He willed you to reject it or did you choose to do it? Let’s assume when you rejected the Gospel the first time that it was what you were programmed to do (because, like a robot, that is what you will do), why then did God give you a second or third or even a hundredth time to receive his Gospel? Is this not a matter of Him having changed his knowledge with regard to your response to the Gospel? First He foreknew and ordained you to reject his Gospel because that is what you will do. And then He changed his mind (knowledge) to allow you to receive the Gospel.

    Once again: Your statement, “If God knows that the person you are giving the gospel to, will reject it, then that is what the person will do” has absolutely nothing to do with hermeneutics. It is sheer fatalism. Gues what are the roots of fatalism? Yep, Paganism.

    Fatalism is a major premise of Islam, which demands total submission to the sovereignty of Allah. It is widely held in Hinduism, too; in fact, it is a fatalistic view of life that helps keep India’s caste system in place. Greek mythology told of the Moirai, or the Fates, three goddesses pictured as weavers of men’s lives. Their decisions could not be canceled or annulled, even by other gods. Again, fatalism is not a biblical concept.

    Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/fate-destiny.html#ixzz2xEWR4IN2

  • Joe

    Thomas comparing election to fatalism is incorrect.
    What fatalism teaches is this: What is going to be is going to be; one cannot do anything about it. There is no place for means, only ends.

    For election to be consistent with fatalism it would have to posit that despite being genuine believers of the gospel, believers could still be rejected by Jesus.
    It would have to posit that God would or could refuse to save people who wanted to be saved.

    Those who believe in election don’t believe that. They believe that those who truly believe on the gospel of Christ are definitely saved. They believe that as many as would come to Jesus He will in no ways cast out or turn away.

    The accusation of election being equal to fatalism and of people being trapped in a scenario against their will is incorrect. They are not consciously fated or forced to do one thing when they would do otherwise if only given the chance. Given the chance many just spurn the gospel of their own volition and that is what they want.

    So there is, in election, no tension between what we want to do and what we’re going to do. Those who want the gospel will certainly be saved and accepted of Jesus. Those that don’t want the gospel will spurn it of their own accord and reap the fruits thereof.

  • Joe, Since our discussion I have still to find out what you mean by election. You have so many ideas on election that its becoming impossible to know what you believe. If there is such a thing as election unto salvation then the opposite thereof, election unto damnation, must also be true. As such, fatalism is not such a bad word to use for election unto salvation and damnation. You don’t believe man has a free-will to either choose for or against God and yet you say “Given the chance many just spurn the Gospel of their own volition and that is what they want.” This is free-will par excellence.

    You wrote,

    So there is, in election, no tension between what we want to do and what we’re going to do. Those who want the gospel will certainly be saved and accepted of Jesus. Those that don’t want the gospel will spurn it of their own accord and reap the fruits thereof.

    You can’t have election unto salvation in which God’s sovereign choice is irresistible, irreversible and unchangeable (Westminster Confession of Faith) and simultaneously grant man the choice to be saved or not. Had it been so, man’s choice would’ve overruled God’s sovereign choice which is the very thing you withstand.

    Fatalism is so narrowly intertwined with the doctrine of election that Wikipedia discusses it in tandem with Calvinism.

    You wrote,

    What fatalism teaches is this: What is going to be is going to be; one cannot do anything about it. There is no place for means, only ends.

    Can the elect who have been chosen unto salvation un-elect themselves. If not, then election unto salvation is indeed something that will be and no one can do anything about it. That’s fatalism at its very best.

  • Joe

    Thank you for the interaction Thomas.
    You wrote; “You don’t believe man has a free-will to either choose for or against God and yet you say “Given the chance many just spurn the Gospel of their own volition and that is what they want.” This is free-will par excellence.”

    I never wrote that. People who hold to election certainly do believe that man naturally and of their own volition will choose against God without any interference from anyone.

  • Joe,

    I never wrote that. People who hold to election certainly do believe that man naturally and of their own volition will choose against God without any interference from anyone.

    Can they only choose against Him or are they capable of choosing for Him as well? You see, if they cannot do both then they don’t have a free-will.

  • Joe

    Thomas what do you call, choosing what you want of your own volition without being forced to?

  • Joe

    Thomas what do you call, choosing what you want of your own volition without being forced to? I forgot to add, “Even if it is against God”.

  • Joe,

    I am not your fool. Answer my question. “Can they only choose against Him or are they capable of choosing for Him as well? You see, if they cannot do both then they don’t have a free-will.”

  • Joe

    Neither am I your fool. Why do you refuse to answer the following, “If God’s knowledge cannot be added to or changed, then how can you be certain that the person you are giving the gospel to can definitely believe since he might be one of the people that God knows to have turned the gospel away? If God knows that the person you are giving the gospel to, will reject it, then that is what the person will do.”

    You refuse to do it because you cannot. The reason you cannot is because you know that the logical conclusion is that your view of God’s omniscience is open theism and nothing less. If the person should choose something different to God’s knowledge then this will mean that God does not know everything.

    Please do not come with fatalism again as I have already clearly shown that election is definitely not fatalism.

  • Joe,

    You refuse to do it because you cannot. The reason you cannot is because you know that the logical conclusion is that your view of God’s omniscience is open theism and nothing less. If the person should choose something different to God’s knowledge then this will mean that God does not know everything.

    No one chooses contrary to or something different to God’s knowledge. The ultimate choice someone makes – for or against God – is what God knew before the foundation of the world. God’s knowledge does not equal election. That’s silly.

  • Joe,

    Thomas what do you call, choosing what you want of your own volition without being forced to?

    I call it “made in the image of God” and divinely gifted free-will.

  • Hans

    Joe, Is God just? God is. Can God be just in accusing you of something that is impossible for you, and still be just? 2Th 2:10 and every type of evil to deceive those who are dying, those who refused to love the truth that would save them. 2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. In these two different translations Iwant to focus on: “ them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved”. Why do some perish? They hear the truth of the gospel but refuse to love the truth. There free will is used to their own destruction. This is what God is accusing them of. If we are so depraved as to not have a choice in who and what we love, we are nothing more than robots, and if some of these robots, created by God, are send to hell and others to heaven, tell me, where is the justice of God? Where is the love of God. Did God force you to love your wife, or any of those you love? Did God force any person to love the things in the world that he loves, and then tell them. 1Jn 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. How sadistic would it be of God to give this command, if it was impossible for us to have a choice in who or what we love? It is love for the truth, the truth in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the truth in the Spirit of Jesus Christ, displayed on the cross that changes hearts. We have a choice to love the Spirit of Christ or not to love Him. This choice starts from within, just the same as what your love for your wife or those you love started from within. Love for God leads to faith in God. God is a Spirit, therefore we can conclude that: Love for the Spirit of God leads to faith in the Spirit of God, and by this faith, real faith, God gives unto us his Spirit to dwell in us, to teach and to guide us in all righteousness.

  • Joe

    Hans I appreciate your post. You are confused, the two texts you quote are quite different in their application. The 2 Thess 2 text is dealing with unbelievers while the 1Jn 2 text is addressing believers. Obviously the regenerate man can and should obey God regarding the 1 Jn 2 text.

    The question is what is the natural desire of the unregenerate man with the Adamic nature of 2 Thess 2? Does the Bible teach that fallen man seeks after God or can love God as you state? Does the Bible teach that things of the Spirit can be discerned by the unregenerate man in the flesh?

    You are reading things into the text of 2 Thess 2 that are not stated in the text.

  • Hans

    Joe, the 2 Thess 2 text refers to unbelievers and the reason why they are unbelievers, and that reason being that they refused to love the truth that would save them. If you refuse to love the truth that would save you, what would be the opposite of that? That would be to love the truth when presented to you. Is there scripture that confirm this.Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. Look at the last part of the sentence:”but faith which worketh by love”. Fallen man will not seek God, but God is seeking fallen man through the gospel of his Son. Do you think that faith is a gift of God?

  • John B

    Thank you Joe and Thomas. Few people take the time to discuss such an important issue as effectively. Each of you are to be commended for your patience. Thank you.

  • joe

    John, thank you for your gracious comment.

  • joe

    Hans, thank you for your comment. Once again you are confused with Galatians 5:6. The people Paul is addressing are believers in Galatia who are in danger of following the Judaizers who are advocating they go back under the law.
    The context can be seen from Galatians 3 where Paul says;

    Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

    Obviously we are dealing with sanctification and not salvation from death to life.

  • joe

    Thomas, I hope that you are well. Did you receive my last comments?

  • Joe,

    I am as well as a I can get. I deleted you last comments because you are talking through your neck. I don’t have time to waste.

  • Hans

    Joe,are you presenting arguments for the sake of arguing or do you really search for truth? I am asking this because of your refusal to comment or ask any question to what I have mentioned.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I see that you have a gratuitous go at me on a post that Hans wrote elsewhere. You post what is in your interest only. Why don’t you post what I wrote and then have a go at me. You are definitely not showing christian character, indeed you are showing a dishonesty which is troubling.

  • Joe, I don’t have time to waste on anyone whose statements are illogical, inconsistent and unfounded. Your question “So the bottom line is that God still creates people knowing that there is no way that they are going to come to Him since in His knowledge they will not choose for Him if you will. Is that fatalism?” is just plain silly. A fallacious Christian character, I should think, rather fits you because you are deliberately misleading our readers and I won’t tolerate it. God’s omnipotent knowledge is NOT fatalism. Although God knew beforehand that Adam and Eve would sin, He still created them. Is that fatalism? Free choice or free-will is not fatalism.

  • Joe

    Thomas, you are quite correct, it is not fatalism. In the same manner that election is not fatalism yet that is what you would have us believe. What then do you call the fact that God still creates people knowing that there is no way that they are going to come to Him since in His knowledge they will not choose Him?

  • Hans

    Joe, I at times come to the conclusion that it is a bad thing to know too much about history, even the history of the time when some of scripture were written, for it might cloud our judgment. I want to ask you something. God said to the Galatians:.Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. Does that mean that the wording “faith which worketh by love.” is not also a fact on its own. I see two facts in this sentence: 1.In Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision. (a fact on its own) and 2.faith which worketh by love. (another fact on its own) and it would not matter in which century or which congregation it would be said, both facts will always be the truth.

  • Joe,

    I have told you many times that salvation is not simply a case of choosing or not choosing God. Salvation is to be convicted of the Holy Spirit that you are a lost sinner who needs Jesus to save you. (John 16:8). All of mankind have an equal opportunity to respond to the conviction of the Holy Spirit or to reject his conviction. God’s omnipotent knowledge does not cause anyone to choose or not to choose Him? Election unto salvation or damnation, on the other hand, is fatalism par excellence because the elect and the reprobate have no choice to either accept or reject Him. Their final destination has been decided upon before the foundation of the world. They have absolutely no choice in the matter. That’s fatalism. In this particular case God’s knowledge is dependent on his sovereign election. He knows because He ordained or predestined. Again this excludes free-will.

    God knew beforehand that most of his creatures will not choose Him and yet Peter wrote “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. The verse oozes free-will. God is not willing that any should perish and yet He does not infringe on man’s free-will of the many who do not choose Him. It did not motivate Him to create only those whom He knew beforehand would choose Him. Had this been true, He would never have inspired Peter to write 2 Peter 3:9. In fact, the created ones, whom He knew would choose Him would never have understood 2 Peter 3:9 and many other similar passages in Scripture.

    Read this http://www.thebereancall.org/content/why-does-god-create-unsaved

  • Joe

    Hans, I think that if you apply it to saved people then yes, but you cannot apply that to unsaved people.
    Hans I have to disagree with you on the historical context though. There is a thing called authorial intent when reading any written matter and that must take preference over what we think or do not think.
    Thank you so much for all the interaction.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I just want to thank you for the response. I also want to say that I do not go from blog to blog causing strife. Yours is the only site which I have been commenting.

    You wrote, “Their final destination has been decided upon before the foundation of the world. They have absolutely no choice in the matter. That’s fatalism.”

    When then did God know when man would either believe or not believe in Him?

  • Joe,

    You are nit-picking. You know as well as I when God knew exactly who would believe on Him and who would reject Him. In any case, with God there is no such thing as past, present and future. He transcends time and space. He sees, hears and knows everything simultaneously and at once. That’s why He is called I AM. However, because we live within the confines of time and space, the Bible needs to use terminology that we understand and can associate with. Hence the expression “before the foundation of the world.”

    Another thing. God created Adam and Eve. From then on He gave man the mandate and the ability to create its own kind. If man were to have created only an elect, He would have been going against his own command “be fruitful and fill the earth.” Again I say, election unto salvation and damnation is sheer fatalism because it excludes free-will.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I am not nit-picking. If God always just knew as you say then when did man have a free will apart from or within the knowledge of God so that God would pick the elect?

  • Joe,

    You ought to know when man began to have a free-will. Let me introduce you to Mr. and Mrs. Adam and Eve. When are you going to learn that there is no such thing as election unto salvation?

  • Joe

    Thomas thanks for your patience. I am still waiting for you to give me some proof for your argument for elect unto service only. When did God figure out who would believe upon Him? If He always just knew then where is man’s freewill since it is sure that what God always knew could not have come from anything but Himself?

  • Joe,

    You must realize that I am not going to do your thinking for you. However, let’s see whether you can understand the following.

    1) God knew long before He created Adam and Eve that they would listen to Satan instead of to Him, fall into sin and take the whole of the human race with them.
    2) Yet, God created Adam and Eve with a free-will to choose for or against Him.

    Maybe you would like to fill in the rest. Can you?

  • Joe

    Thomas I am thinking just fine. Could Adam and Eve have chosen differently to what God knew they were going to do? ie Listen to God instead of Satan. No they could not, so it was determined before creation that Adam and Eve were going to listen to Satan of their own volition and there was nothing else they were ever going to do.
    For your type of freewill to be able to manifest itself, Adam and Eve would have had to have the ability to listen to God thus averting the fall and indeed confounding God’s eternal knowledge. Dream on Thomas.

  • Joe,

    Thomas I am thinking just fine. Could Adam and Eve have chosen differently to what God knew they were going to do? ie Listen to God instead of Satan. No they could not, so it was determined before creation that Adam and Eve were going to listen to Satan of their own volition and there was nothing else they were ever going to do. For your type of freewill to be able to manifest itself, Adam and Eve would have had to have the ability to listen to God thus averting the fall and indeed confounding God’s eternal knowledge. Dream on Thomas.

    You have just proved that your view is pure fatalism. According to your understanding of God’s knowledge Adam and Eve had no other choice but to sin. That’s fatalism, my friend. Why do you think God planted a tree of knowledge of good and evil? Did He do it for fun? He planted the tree to present them with a simple command? Why?

    I’m sure you will agree that love is the essence of any relationship. However, Adam and Eve were in no position to either show forth love for God or to receive love because they were still in in a state of complete innocence. That’s why God had to put them in a time of probation to give them an opportunity to prove their love for Him and the only way to do it was to give them a command. Obedience to God is the foundation of love for Him. Jesus Himself said so. “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” (John 15:10) Had God not placed them within a time frame of probation, they would have remained innocent but never capable of obeying and loving Him.

    You’re wrong. Determinism has no respect for free-will. Therefore, you cannot say “it was determined before creation that Adam and Eve were going to listen to Satan of their own volition and there was nothing else they were ever going to do.” If they had nothing else to do, you cannot attribute free-will to them. You are the one who’s dreaming. Wake up and face the facts.

    Once again: God’s knowledge has absolutely nothing to do with determinism. predestination or election.

  • Joe

    Thomas, you are an open Theist. Your view of God’s knowledge is irrational. How can God know something is going to happen and yet something else can happen? That makes God’s knowledge changeable and thus not omniscient. You are going around in circles trying to protect a flawed view of man’s free will while denying God free will.
    Your understanding of fatalism is also flawed. Fatalism says that if someone wants to come to God that God will say no to that person. God actually says that as many as will come to Him He will not cast out. That is not fatalism.

  • Let’s start with your statement “God actually says that as many as will come to Him He will not cast out. That is not fatalism.” “Whosoever will” come to him is sheer free-willism and debunks election. You are the one who is dabbling in open theism. If God determines, decides, predestines, elects someone to go to heaven and that person should use his God-given free-will and decides that he does not want to go to heaven, then that person is overriding God’s sovereignty. Surely free-will allows a person to want to or to will to be an elect or not. Or does he have no option and MUST of necessity accept his election without any say in the matter? Your view says the following. God says: “You have the free-will to love me or not but you have no option but to accept my sovereign choice to elect you for heaven.” Once again, that’s sheer fatalism. You are walking around with election blinkers on your eyes and refuse to consider everything I had written on Adam and Eve’s innocence and God’s probative period for them to give them an opportunity to decide whether they want to love Him or not. He was never going to force them to love Him because enforced love is no love at all. Despite God’s prefect foreknowledge He is constantly testing his saints whether they love Him. Here are a few examples.

    If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. (Deu 13:1-3).

    If God knew everything perfectly before the foundation of the world, why does He have to prove the love of his saints to see whether they love Him with all their heart and with all their soul? I believe that God sent the foul doctrines of Calvinism and election unto salvation to test his saints whether they love Him in this way.

    Here’s another one.

    And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I KNOW that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me. (Gen 22:9-12)

    Did God only know then that Abraham feared Him? Surely, He must have known before the foundation of the world that Abraham would fear and love Him and not withhold his only son from being sacrificed. So, what was the point? Why did God command Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac? Do you KNOW why?

    Explain to me the following.

    And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. (Exo 32:14)

    As you may know this was the time when God wanted to destroy Israel because they made for themselves a golden calf. Yet Abraham prayed and changed God’s mind. God knew long before Israel existed that they would commit idolatry and that He would decide to judge them accordingly, and yet He allowed a man of dust an ashes to change his mind – indeed to change God’s knowledge. Does that take away or malign his omniscience? Of course not.

    Don’t accuse me of espousing a flawed view of free-will when your view of election unto salvation totally robs man of free-will.

  • Joe

    Thomas you wrote, “God knew long before Israel existed that they would commit idolatry and that He would decide to judge them accordingly, and yet He allowed a man of dust an ashes to change his mind – indeed to change God’s knowledge. Does that take away or malign his omniscience? Of course not.”

    So mere man changed God’s knowledge? The created changed the knowledge of the Creator? At least you are starting to be consistent with your flawed theology now, which has by necessity led to open Theism. It certainly does malign His omniscience, because for man to change God’s knowledge means that God was never omniscient to begin with, and that is frankly a revolting description of the God of the Bible.

    What about the verses that seem to contradict Exodus 32:14?

    Malachi 3:6 “For I am the Lord; I change not.”

    Numbers 23:19 “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent.”

    Ezekiel 24:14 “I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent.”

    They obviously do not contradict Exodus 32 since there are no contradictions in the scripture.

    The scriptures clearly portray God in an anthropomorphic nature so that we as humans can understand and relate to God. When God called out to Adam and Eve in the garden to find out where they were, directly after the fall, do you think that He did not know where they were? Was He waiting to hear from them so that He could learn where they were? Obviously not.

    In the same manner do you not think that God in eternity past had not decreed the ends and the means to make certain that He would fulfill His covenant with Abraham? By destroying Israel, God would have violated His unconditional covenant with Abraham and the provisions thereof, including spiritual blessings that were to extend to the Gentiles through the Messiah. That would make God a liar. God’s end was obviously to fulfill the covenant He made with Abraham and His means was Moses’ prayer decreed in eternity past.

    That is the reason that people who believe in election evangelize the lost. They know that bringing the elect to Himself is the ends which God has decreed, whilst they who do the proclaiming of the gospel are the means by which God has decreed this to happen.

  • Joe wrote:

    Thomas you wrote, “God knew long before Israel existed that they would commit idolatry and that He would decide to judge them accordingly, and yet He allowed a man of dust an ashes to change his mind – indeed to change God’s knowledge. Does that take away or malign his omniscience? Of course not.”

    So mere man changed God’s knowledge? The created changed the knowledge of the Creator? At least you are starting to be consistent with your flawed theology now, which has by necessity led to open Theism. It certainly does malign His omniscience, because for man to change God’s knowledge means that God was never omniscient to begin with, and that is frankly a revolting description of the God of the Bible.

    OK wise guy, tell me in detail what happened in Exodus 32. Why did God repent (change his mind) after having decided before the foundation of the world to destroy Israel? Or do you believe that God did indeed destroy Israel and since then has transferred all his promises to Israel to the Gentile church (Replacement Theology)?

    You wrote:

    That is the reason that people who believe in election evangelize the lost. They know that bringing the elect to Himself is the ends which God has decreed, whilst they who do the proclaiming of the gospel are the means by which God has decreed this to happen.

    If God decreed before the foundation of the world to elect unto salvation only some out of the fallen race of man and if no one can thwart, change or alter his sovereign decree, what’s the point in proclaiming the Gospel? Or do you presumptuously believe that your preaching of the Gospel is the means by which the elect are drawn to God so that they may be saved? I am sure you wouldn’t want to be so presumptuous to think that you have done something to accomplish God’s election. You must have read my post “Soul winning is foolishness” This is precisely what Calvinists believe. They do indeed proclaim the Gospel but do not believe that soul winning is their duty. Why, Because they believe that in doing that, they are maligning God’s sovereignty in election. One of the main reasons why people like you believe in election unto salvation is because man is as dead as a doornail and is totally depraved (unable) to understand or to respond to the Gospel. If that is so, how on earth are they going to respond to the Gospel when they are totally depraved (unable) to understand it? Or is your preaching of the Gospel something so special and miraculous that when you open your mouth to proclaim it, the elect’s ears are suddenly opened and they begin to understand it? That’s as presumptuous as it may come. Shame on you!

    Your arguments aren’t only fallacious but downright impractical.

  • Joe wrote:

    Thomas you wrote, “God knew long before Israel existed that they would commit idolatry and that He would decide to judge them accordingly, and yet He allowed a man of dust an ashes to change his mind – indeed to change God’s knowledge. Does that take away or malign his omniscience? Of course not.”

    So mere man changed God’s knowledge? The created changed the knowledge of the Creator? At least you are starting to be consistent with your flawed theology now, which has by necessity led to open Theism. It certainly does malign His omniscience, because for man to change God’s knowledge means that God was never omniscient to begin with, and that is frankly a revolting description of the God of the Bible.

    Here’s another question for you. God had perfect knowledge before the foundation of the world that Adam and Eve were going to disobey Him and fall into sin. Would they have changed his perfect knowledge if they had not sinned? To say that God’s knowledge is unchangeable and that his sovereignty and omniscience would be compromised if it were changeable, is to believe that God ordained and caused Adam and Eve to sin. That’s blasphemy, to say the least.

    Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isa 5:20)

  • Joe

    Thomas you wrote, “OK wise guy, tell me in detail what happened in Exodus 32. Why did God repent (change his mind) after having decided before the foundation of the world to destroy Israel? Or do you believe that God did indeed destroy Israel and since then has transferred all his promises to Israel to the Gentile church (Replacement Theology)?”

    I answered that in my previous post, but here it is again;

    “In the same manner do you not think that God in eternity past had not decreed the ends and the means to make certain that He would fulfill His covenant with Abraham? By destroying Israel, God would have violated His unconditional covenant with Abraham and the provisions thereof, including spiritual blessings that were to extend to the Gentiles through the Messiah. That would make God a liar. God’s end was obviously to fulfill the covenant He made with Abraham and His means was Moses’ prayer decreed in eternity past.”

    Furthermore do not label me as a replacement theologian. You know fully well from the interactions we have had that I am consistently dispensational. You can also see that in my answer above regarding the Abrahamic Covenant.

    What about the scriptures that I have quoted which clearly show another side to the repentance of God. You are not going to deal with them because you can’t.

  • Joe

    Thomas you said,” Here’s another question for you. God had perfect knowledge before the foundation of the world that Adam and Eve were going to disobey Him and fall into sin. Would they have changed his perfect knowledge if they had not sinned? To say that God’s knowledge is unchangeable and that his sovereignty and omniscience would be compromised if it were changeable, is to believe that God ordained and caused Adam and Eve to sin. That’s blasphemy, to say the least.

    Like I said you are an open Theist. You cannot seem to see the problem with God’s omniscience being changeable. By definition omniscience means perfect knowledge. If that knowledge can be changed or added to then by definition it is not perfect. That means that God is not immutable as the Bible teaches. What a frightening concept.

    Can you please define what man’s freewill actually entails. How free is man?

  • Joe,

    Like I said you are an open Theist. You cannot seem to see the problem with God’s omniscience being changeable. By definition omniscience means perfect knowledge. If that knowledge can be changed or added to then by definition it is not perfect. That means that God is not immutable as the Bible teaches. What a frightening concept.

    Can you please define what man’s freewill actually entails. How free is man?

    You are not answering my questions. Let’s try again.

    God had perfect knowledge before the foundation of the world that Adam and Eve were going to disobey Him and fall into sin. Would they have changed his perfect knowledge if they had not sinned? To say that God’s knowledge is unchangeable and that his sovereignty and omniscience would be compromised if it were changeable, is to believe that God ordained and caused Adam and Eve to sin. That’s blasphemy, to say the least.

    Did God know in advance that Adam and Eve would sin? Yes or no.
    If He knew that they would sin and if his knowledge is unchangeable then He must have willed, ordained and caused them to sin.

    Do you believe that God willed, ordained and caused Adam and Eve to sin?

  • Joe,

    I asked you whether you were a Replacement theologian. I did not say you were. So, you have decided that when I do not respond to all the verses you quote it is because I can’t. You have failed to answered many of my questions. Is it because you can’t?

  • Joe,

    Malachi 3:6 says God Himself is unchangeable. It does not say He cannot change his mind.

    Well, then Numbers 23:19 seems to contradict other verses in Scripture, according to you, for instance Genesis 6:6; Exodus 32:14; Judges 2:18; 1 Samuel 15:35; 2 Samuel 24:16; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Psalm 106:45; Amos 7:3; Amos 7:6. Dot you ever read your Bible?

    Ezekiel 24:14. Read the context. You cannot use this as a template or a standard procedure to say God never repented of (regretted) his original decisions.

    The above are not anthropomorphic examples so that we may understand and relate to God. They are examples of times when God actually decided to change his original decisions for the benefit or judgment of man. He actually regretted that He made Adam and Eve because they sidestepped his original decision that they should obey and love Him with all their heart and not sin. His original decision was that they be holy and blameless. They were the ones who thwarted God’s original decision (knowledge) and He regretted it. It’s as simple as that. Unless, of course as you believe, He deliberately wanted them to sin and ordained and caused them to sin so that his original knowledge would not be changed. Thats not only preposterous but dangerously blasphemous, to say the least. You are attributing things to God that belong to Satan.

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! (Isa 5:20)

    You should repent of your evil.

  • Joe

    Thomas, it is very simple. If God knew in eternity past that Adam and Eve were going to fall then how is it possible that they would not? Was He mistaken in His thinking in eternity past? For your theory to work then it is possible that God could have been wrong in eternity past and Adam and Eve may have surprised God by obeying Him.

    So you serve a God that could be wrong every day, He could be mistaken every day and He is certainly in for a couple of surprises. His knowledge can be thwarted by the creature. It seems to me that giving glory to man’s supposed freewill whilst denying God any is the real blasphemy. What a pitiful take on the God of the Bible.

  • Joe,

    Let me ask you again.

    Did God ordain and cause Adam and Eve to sin? Yes or no?

    Would Adam and Eve have overruled God’s knowledge if they had not sinned? Please answer my questions.

  • Joe wrote:

    Thomas, it is very simple. If God knew in eternity past that Adam and Eve were going to fall then how is it possible that they would not?

    So, God wanted them to sin. He willed them to sin. He ordained them to sin so that his knowledge would remain in tact. The reason why you believe these atrocious lies is because you do not know what true love is. You are so obsessed with God’s sovereignty that you don’t have a clue what love and free-will is. Yes, you talk about free-will but you don’t know what it is.

  • Joe

    Thomas, if God had known in eternity past that Adam and Eve would not sin then there is no way they could have surprised God by sinning. What God knows cannot change either way.

  • Joe,

    You are dodging my questions. Did God ordain, will, cause Adam and Eve to sin. YES OR NO?

  • I want to put it on record that Joe refuses to answer my questions. He is either not capable or does not want to disadvantage himself in answering the question: “Did God ordain, will, cause Adam and Eve to sin. YES OR NO?” If he should answer “yes” he would be placing himself squarely in the Calvinistic camp that believes God caused man to sin which, to say the least, is an abhorrent doctrine.

  • Joe

    Thomas let me put it on record that those that believe in election certainly do not believe that God caused Adam and Eve or anyone else to sin. I have told you this in my previous posts. They did that of their own volition. You are the one that continuously misrepresents or just does not understand the election position.
    Furthermore let me ask you once again, “Can you please define what man’s freewill actually entails. How free is man?”

  • Joe,

    Thomas let me put it on record that those that believe in election certainly do not believe that God caused Adam and Eve or anyone else to sin. I have told you this in my previous posts. They did that of their own volition. You are the one that continuously misrepresents or just does not understand the election position.
    Furthermore let me ask you once again, “Can you please define what man’s freewill actually entails. How free is man?”

    How on earth could they have sinned of their own volition when the possibility of them having not sinned would have overridden God’s knowledge? “Volition” (free-will) means that man has the ability to choose between two possibilities. It does not mean that he MUST do because if he didn’t God’s knowledge would be compromised. That’s not free-will. It is fatalism at its very best. You say one thing and believe another.

    How free is man?

    I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: (Deu 30:19)

    Man has the awesome ability to choose between life (heaven) and death (hell).

    That’s exactly what God put to Adam and Eve. “You have a choice between heaven and hell, and I urge you to choose heaven (life).”

    You said:

    Thomas, if God had known in eternity past that Adam and Eve would not sin then there is no way they could have surprised God by sinning. What God knows cannot change either way.

    God knew that they would sin because his knowledge determined that they would sin. If they hadn’t sinned, God’s knowledge would have been seriously compromised. Is that it? Does it mean they could not have not sinned because God’s knowledge determined that they would sin? That’s not only irrational but ridiculous to say the least.

  • Joe

    Thomas, it is ridiculous to someone who believes God’s knowledge can change. It is ridiculous to someone who believes that God can be surprised by man’s choices. It is ridiculous to an open Theist.
    To someone who believes that the Bible teaches about a God with perfect knowledge (Omniscience)and that adding to that knowledge makes God’s knowledge imperfect that is just not acceptable.

    That is the reason that you can never accept that election either by determined foreknowledge or the looking ahead of time type of foreknowledge can be unto salvation. If election is only unto service as you claim then show it to us. You cannot, and the reason is simply because for a man to be elected unto anything in the current dispensation ultimately means that he has to be elected unto salvation. The current dispensation speaks to the priesthood of believers and the gifting which has been imparted through the Holy Spirit at the time of salvation is to be used in service to build up the church. As the royal priesthood of believers, all saints are automatically called to service with the gifts which they have been given at their adoption into the great family of God.

  • Joe,

    I can only come to one conclusion and that is that you do not believe the Bible. Full stop. You are wasting my time. I have proven to you again and again that election is unto blessing and service and never unto salvation. You are either blind by your own choice or you have been blinded by God because He chose to blind you. Please don’t comment here again. You are deliberately misleading, not only yourself, but others as well. I will not read your comments again.

  • Gabe W

    Augustinian-Calvinsism = Manichaenism synchronized Marcion teachings.

    Listened to McArthur other day extol Augustine’s teachings from the pulpit other day.
    He praised the theological writings of a ‘christian’ of only 2 years out of the gnostic-Manichean cult? Ugh.

    If you can’t get John 3:16, then demand a refund from your seminary/cemetery.

  • Mark

    My main concern with this article is not that you hate Calvinism. It’s that you hate the truth that is clearly presented in God’s word. I do not claim to fully understand election, yet I know that God does elect. Ask yourself if you would have responded in the same way as the many disciples in John 6:65,66.

    The following are verses to take into consideration. I hope you understand that these are not just pet verses I cling to without taking into consideration the rest of Scripture. I know how difficult it is to try and understand how God chose a certain people for Himself, yet I cannot deny that His word teaches it:

    Mark 13:20, John 1:12,13 + 6:37,44,65,66 + 10:28,29 + 15:16,19 + 17:2,6,9,11,12,24, Acts 13:48, Rom 8:28-30 + 9:11,15-20,22,23 + Eph 1:4,5,11 + 2:8,9, Phil 1:28,29 + 1 Thess 1:4 + 2 Thess 2:13 + 2 Tim 1:9

    May the Lord bless you with wisdom and truth

  • Mark wrote:

    My main concern with this article is not that you hate Calvinism. It’s that you hate the truth that is clearly presented in God’s word. I do not claim to fully understand election, yet I know that God does elect. Ask yourself if you would have responded in the same way as the many disciples in John 6:65,66.

    The following are verses to take into consideration. I hope you understand that these are not just pet verses I cling to without taking into consideration the rest of Scripture. I know how difficult it is to try and understand how God chose a certain people for Himself, yet I cannot deny that His word teaches it: Mark 13:20, John 1:12,13 + 6:37,44,65,66 + 10:28,29 + 15:16,19 + 17:2,6,9,11,12,24, Acts 13:48, Rom 8:28-30 + 9:11,15-20,22,23 + Eph 1:4,5,11 + 2:8,9, Phil 1:28,29 + 1 Thess 1:4 + 2 Thess 2:13 + 2 Tim 1:9

    May the Lord bless you with wisdom and truth.

    You are quite right; I hate Calvinism as much as I hate Roman Catholicism, atheism, Satanism and all the other isms which are leading people to hell. However, I love Calvinists, Roman Catholics etc. because I don’t want them to go to hell as much as Jesus Christ Himself does not want them to go to hell.

    Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Ezekiel 33:11).

    From this it is abundantly clear that any sinner is capable of turning from his evil ways, repent and receive Jesus Christ as his Saviour. What makes this verse so awesome is that God is calling upon his elect people, Israel, to repent of their evil ways. The entire nation of Israel is God’s elect (Romans 11:28) and yet most of them are going to hell (Matthew 8:12). That doesn’t say much for the so-called elect who supposedly are going to heaven because God predestined and ordained them to eternal life before the foundation of the world. It proves beyond any doubt that the elect are all bound for hell unless they repent and receive the real Jesus Christ of the Bible as their Saviour.

    Who are the wicked? Are only Calvinists wicked? Doesn’t the Bible say “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God?” (Romans 3:23). If all of mankind without exception have sinned then Jesus Christ must have been born, crucified, resurrected and ascended into heaven in behalf all of all mankind. How do I know? Well, Jesus said: “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save the elect only.” (Luke 19:10). Is that what He said? That’s what you believe He said, which, of course, is an infamous lie. And then you have the chutzpah to accuse me of hating the truth?

    If all those verses you mentioned refer to the elect, as you say, then you must explain why they contradict so many other verses in Scripture, for instance, John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, Luke 19:10, 2 Peter 3:9, Revelation 22:17. Apart from the fact that you have taken all the verses you mentioned out of context, you are reading into them things that are not there.

    Mark 13:20. The context here is the seven year tribulation which is also called the time of Jacob’s (Israel’s) trouble. Therefore, the elect refer to Israel (Isaiah 45:4; Romans 11:28) who are going to be gathered from all corners of the earth to return to Jerusalem after they had been scattered throughout the world to escape the wrath of Antichrist who had set up an ab abominable idol in the most holy of the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. Jesus describes this even in Matthew 24.

    When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened. (Mat 24:15-22).

    John 1:12 and 13. Barnes explains these verses as follows and I agree with him.

    Not of blood – The Greek word is plural; not of “bloods” – that is, not of “man.” Compare Mat_27:4. The Jews prided themselves on being the descendants of Abraham, Mat_3:9. They supposed that it was proof of the favor of God to be descended from such an illustrious ancestry. In this passage this notion is corrected. It is not because men are descended from an illustrious or pious parentage that they are entitled to the favor of God; or perhaps the meaning may be, not because there is a union of illustrious lines of ancestry or “bloods” in them. The law of Christ’s kingdom is different from what the Jews supposed. Compare 1Pe_1:23. It was necessary to be “born of God” by regeneration. Possibly, however, it may mean that they did not become children of God by the bloody rite of “circumcision,” as many of the Jews supposed they did. This is agreeable to the declaration of Paul in Rom_2:28-29.Nor of the will of the flesh – Not by natural generation.

    Nor of the will of man – This may refer, perhaps, to the will of man in adopting a child, as the former phrases do to the natural birth; and the design of using these three phrases may have been to say that they became the children of God neither in virtue of their descent from illustrious parents like Abraham, nor by their natural birth, nor by being “adopted” by a pious man. None of the ways by which we become entitled to the privileges of “children” among people can give us a title to be called the sons of God. It is not by human power or agency that men become children of the Most High.
    But of God – That is, God produces the change, and confers the privilege of being cawed his children. The heart is changed by his power. No unaided effort of man, no works of ours, can produce this change. At the same time, it is true that no man is renewed who does not himself “desire” and “will” to be a believer; for the effect of the change is on his “will” Psa_110:3, and no one is changed who does not strive to enter in at the strait gate, Phi_2:12. This important verse, therefore, teaches us:

    1. That if men are saved they must be born again.
    2. That their salvation is not the result of their birth, or of any honorable or pious parentage.
    3. That the children of the rich and the noble, as well as of the poor, must be born of God if they will be saved.
    4. That the children of pious parents must be born again; or they cannot be saved. None will go to heaven simply because their “parents” are Christians.
    5. That this work is the work of God, and “no man” can do it for us.
    6. That we should forsake all human dependence, least off all confidence in the flesh, and go at once to the throne of grace, and beseech of God to adopt us into his family and save our souls from death.

    Did you notice point number 6? You cannot be saved unless you want (will) to be saved and unless you call on the Name of the Lord to be saved (Acts 2:21). Only God can save lost sinners but they must be willing to believe that they are lost sinners and desperately in need of a Saviour and approach Him in prayer with a request to be saved. He does not arbitrarily and monergistically save and zap the so-called elect without them having to realize that they need to be saved and without them having to believe in order to be saved. Faith, according to Calvinists, is given as a gift to the elect only after they had been arbitrarily and monergistically saved.

    Verse 12 distinctly says that the many who receive Him (believe in Him) are saved. He does not say only the elect are saved. (Hebrews 11:6).

    John 6:37, 44, 65, 66. The key to a correct understanding of these verses is verse 36 “But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.” (John 6:36). He never said that they will forfeit eternal life because they are not the elect. He said their unbelief was the reason they would not make it to heaven. Having said this, it is easy to understand verse 37 which simply means that the Father has given to the Son all those who believe. Those who refuse to believe are not given to the Son. In other words faith is the key to the giving to the Son and not election.

    Why do you Calvinists always quote John 6:44 and never 12:32? Are you afraid of Johan 12:32? “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth (crucified), will draw all men unto me.” And please don’t tell me that “all” refers to the elect only. If so, I will have to send you back to school so that you can learn what the word “all” means.

    I find it odd that you should quote verse 45 while Calvinists believe that, because man (including the elect) are as dead as a corpse in their sin and transgressions, they cannot hear, understand or respond to the Gospel. And yet here the Bible very clearly says “Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.” Hearing God and learning from Him involves free-will. God does NOT infuse his learning into man. He does not miraculously impart his learning into man’s heart. He must be willing to receive God’s learning, respond to it by faith and It is not the elect who are drawn to God but everyone who hears the Gospel, understand it, responds in faith to it and calls upon the Name of the Lord to be saved. You are contradicting your own Calvinistic beliefs.

    I cannot understand why you Calvinists love to quote verses 65 and 66 and never verse 70, “Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? (Judas Iscariot)” (John 6:70). Do you see that? Judas Iscariot was one of God’s chosen elect. If there is such a thing as election unto salvation and it always is unto salvation, then Judas Iscariot must have been saved. Perish the thought. This choice, therefore, could not possibly have been unto salvation but was Jesus’ call to them to serve Him. Judas was a tragic figure, influenced by Satan; yet he was responsible for his own choices.

    John 10:26-29. This is yet another one of the Calvinists pet verses to prove their doctrine of election. And once again they are way off track. Calvinists believe that the Pharisees were not of his sheep because they were incapable of believing. It was not given to them to believe because they were not sheep but goats, you would say. Not so, even the Pharisees were sheep, albeit not of His sheep. There is only one place in the entire Bible where goats are used to describe people and that is in Matthew 25:32. Here the word “ethne” is used. It refers to Gentiles and not the Jews as a nation. In fact, these are all people other than Jews who have lived through the Tribulation period (Joel 3:2, 12). Consequently the Pharisees (Jews) could not have been goats and therefore the non-elect. Therefore, John 10:26-29 does not say the Pharisees were not of his sheep because they were not the elect. As I proved earlier (Romans 11:28) all of Israel (including the Pharisees) were God’s elect, not unto salvation but unto service. Predestination and election are biblical teachings—but they are never unto salvation. To the Calvinist, however, predestination/election is always and only unto salvation—a view that is imposed wrongly upon Scripture. In fact, election/predestination is always unto specific blessings that accompany salvation, but not to salvation itself.

    John 15:16, 19: There is no evidence in these verses that his choice was unto salvation. Contrary to the common practice in those days when disciples were the ones who did the choosing (they chose their teacher and not the other way around), He was the one who made the choosing and not them. The twelve disciples did not come to Him and say “we want to be your disciples.” He made the choice, which included his choice of Judas Iscariot. This choice was connected to their mission and that mission was to bear lasting fruit. Of course Judas forfeited everything connected to this mission – not because He was not elected, but because of his unbelief and mistrust of Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.

    John 17:2,6,9,11,12,24: You believe that God arbitrarily and monergistically picked out whom He wanted to give to his Son. For this to be true it must not contradict any other passages in Scripture. Ask yourself whether this view harmonizes with John 3:16? Here God clearly says that only those who believe receive eternal life (are given to his Son). Those who do not believe are not given to his Son. Here again faith and faith alone is the key element that ultimately decides whether you are given or not given to the Son (Hebrews 11:6). Trust in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross results in a giving to the Son and not mistrust. Those who mistrust Him do so of their own free-will. They don’t want to be given to his Son and thence are not given. It’s as simple as that. They are not given because they are not elected. They are not given because of their unbelief. Unbelief is the only thing that keeps sinners out of heaven – nothing else. That’s why John 3:18 says: “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” It does NOT say: “He that is given to the Son is not condemned: but he that is not given is condemned already, because the Father did not want to give him to his Son.”

    Acts 13:48: The Calvinist, to support his beliefs, assumes that tetagmenoi must mean predestined to salvation.” Yet that is clearly not the meaning in any of the seven other usages of tasso in the New Testament. If that were the intent, why was tasso used and not prooridzo (predestinated)? In fact, Adam Clarke declares rather dogmatically, “Whatever tetagmenoi may mean, which is the word we translate ordained, it includes no idea of pre-ordination or pre-destination of any kind…. [O]f all the meanings ever put on it, none agrees worse with its nature and known signification than that which represents it as intending those who were predestinated to eternal life; this is no meaning of the term and should never be applied to it.” Nor does the context support the Calvinist rendering, as numerous commentaries declare. McGarvey comments that “the context has no allusion to anything like an appointment of one part, and a rejection of the other, but the writer draws a line of distinction between the conduct of certain Gentiles and that of the Jews addressed by Paul…. Luke says, many of the Gentiles ‘were determined’ for everlasting life. It is an act of the mind to which Paul objects on the part of the Jews, and it is as clearly an act of mind in the Gentiles which Luke puts in contrast with it….” Several authorities trace the KJV’s “ordained” to the corrupt Latin Vulgate, which, as T. E. Page points out, “has praeordinati, unfairly…” Cook’s Commentary reads, “The A.V. [KJV] has followed the Vulgate. Rather, [it should read] were…disposed for eternal life, as in…Josephus….” Likewise Dean Alford translated it, “as many as were disposed to eternal life believed.” The Expositor’s Greek Testament says, “There is no countenance here for the absolutum decretum of the Calvinists.” A. T. Robertson likewise says: “The word ordain is not the best translation here. ‘Appointed,’ as Hacket shows, is better…. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an absolutum decretum…of personal salvation.”

    Romans 8:28-30: The key phrase is “for whom He did foreknow.” God knew before the foundation of the world who would believe in his Son and chose them to be conformed to the image of his Son. IN SCRIPTURE, the basic meaning of the terms predestination and election is the same: to mark out beforehand for a special purpose and blessing. On what basis? The sole reason that is always given is foreknowledge. So declare both Peter and Paul: “For whom he did foreknow [Greek: proginosko], healso did predestinate [proorizo] to be conformed to the image of his Son…” (Romans 8:29); “Elect according to [kata] the foreknowledge [prognosis]of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience…”(1 Peter 1:2). It seems that God predestined certain blessings for those He foreknew would believe the gospel and be saved. The heavenly Father planned from eternity past an inheritance for those who would become His children through faith in Christ Jesus: “That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:7). Never does election or predestination refer to salvation, but always and only to particular benefits.

    Romans 9:11,15-20,22,23: These are yet more pet Calvinistic verses which they grossly misinterpret. Romans 9:11 does not refer to the individual brothers Jacob and Esau. It refers to the two nations who came from them. Paul is quoting the prophet Malachi (Malachi 1:2). Such a statement is “written” nowhere else in Scripture. Nor is Malachi the prophet referring to Jacob and Esau as individuals but to the nations which descended from them: “The…word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. I have loved you…and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste…. Edom…shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them…the people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever…. I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed” (Malachi 1:1–4; 3:6). Quite clearly, by “Esau” is meant the nation of Edom descended from him, and “Jacob” means Israel. Esau and Jacob as individuals are not in view. If it were true that Esau served Jacob, God could have been indicted with false prophecy because Esau never served his brother Jacob.

    “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy” does not mean that He has mercy only on the elect. If that were true Titus 2:11 would have been a lie, “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,” and so would Romans 11:32 “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.”

    Ephesians 1:4,5,11. God’s choice in verse 4 is not unto salvation but unto holiness and blamelessness. Once again it is God foreknowledge that is the key to an understanding of the verse. He foreknew who would respond in faith to the Gospel and chose them to be holy and blameless. The other chapter is Ephesians 1:5,11. You will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either Heaven or Hell, but to Christlikeness eventually. Nowhere are we told in Scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another to be lost. Men are to be saved or lost eternally because of their attitude toward the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Ephesians 2:8,9: The gift in these verses is not faith but salvation through Jesus Christ. The gift of salvation is Jesus Christ Himself and He was given to the entire world so that whosoever believes on Him should have eternal life. An imposed or enforced gift is no gift at all and that’s precisely what the Calvinists believe, i.e. that the gift of faith is given to the elect only AFTER they had been monergistically saved. In other words they are saved without faith on their part in order to receive the gift of faith so that they may believe and be saved. That’s putting the cart before the horse. That’s not only unbiblical but blasphemous to say the least. A gift can only be a gift when the one to whom the gift is presented receives it with thanks. Faith is the means to receive the gift and NOT election.

    1 Thessalonians 1:4: If election is to salvation by Irresistible Grace without any intelligent or moral choice on man’s part, it would be impossible to be sure of one’s election. But if election is to service and blessing, Peter is reinforcing in different words Paul’s exhortation to “walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called” (Ephesians 4:1–6). Thus, to make one’s election sure is to fulfill the responsibility that comes with election, not to somehow be sure that one is among the elect and thus eternally saved. Marvin R. Vincent, an authority on biblical languages explains, “Ekloge, election [is] used of God’s selection of men or agencies for special missions or attainments…. [Nowhere] in the New Testament is there any warrant for the revolting doctrine that God predestined a definite number of mankind to eternal life, and the rest to eternal destruction.

    2 Thessalonians 2:13: A closer reading of 2 Thessalonians 2:13, proves that Paul is not dealing with salvation in the normal sense of the word, (the redemption from sin, judgment and hell), but with “salvation through sanctification.” Indeed, the context tells us that the salvation in this instance, (which is accomplished through sanctification), is the ultimate redemption at the Rapture, (the discarding of the saints’ earthly bodies to receive their new bodies like unto that of Jesus Christ). Salvation in this context, is a redemption, by means of the Rapture, from the wrath of God, which is coming upon the entire world during the tribulation. Paul refers to this, as a salvation to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25). And so, Calvinists, regardless of the warning in 2 Peter 3:16, twist Scripture to their own destruction.

    2 Timothy 1:9: The verse should read as follows: “Who hath saved us (through faith), and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works (but through faith), and according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” The salvation of those whom God foreknew before the foundation of the world would believe the Gospel and be saved, was fixed in Jesus before the foundation of the world but was made manifest with his appearance when He became flesh and died on the cross for their sins.

    I have proved to you that you are the one who hates the truth that is clearly presented in the Bible and that you need to repent and believe the Gospel.

  • Joe

    You don’t need to publish this but I see that you use use elective foreknowledge when it suits you. Well then those that He doesn’t foreknow in eternity past can they come to salvation if He does not foreknow it?
    No wonder you don’t want to speak to me about election unto blessing. Your take on Ephesians 1 is a joke. Verse 1 says;

    4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

    To be chosen before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before God is just a description of what it is to be chosen unto salvation. Only the saved can be holy and blameless before God. This can never apply to the unsaved.

  • Joe wrote:

    You don’t need to publish this but I see that you use use elective foreknowledge when it suits you. Well then those that He doesn’t foreknow in eternity past can they come to salvation if He does not foreknow it?
    No wonder you don’t want to speak to me about election unto blessing. Your take on Ephesians 1 is a joke. Verse 1 says;

    4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

    To be chosen before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before God is just a description of what it is to be chosen unto salvation. Only the saved can be holy and blameless before God. This can never apply to the unsaved.

    Don’t tell me what I must publish or not. You are the one who is a joke. If God foreknew who would believe in Him and be saved, and accordingly choose them to be holy and blameless in his sight, then He must have foreknown who would NOT believe in Him and accordingly NOT choose them to be holy and blameless in his sight. Dave Hunt says the following in his book “What Love is This?” and I agree with him.

    Paul and Peter are encouraging Christians with what God has in store for those who believe the gospel. As Paul declares, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit…” (1 Corinthians 2:9–10).

    Furthermore, not only is predestination/election never said to be unto salvation, but Paul carefully separates predestination from salvation whether in its call, its justification, or its glorification: “whom he did predestinate, them he also [kai] called…them he also [kai] justified…them he also [kai] glorified” (Romans 8:30). The Greek kai shows that a distinction is being made: predestination is not the same as calling, justification, or glorification. Hobbs comments, “Predestination…simply means that God has predetermined that those who respond affirmatively to His call…will be justified…and furthermore will be glorified. All of this is ‘according to His purpose’….” The plain meaning of the text is clear.”

    If your view of Ephesians 1:4 does not harmonize with other passages such as John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2, then you must reject that view. And please don’t tell me “world” refers only to the elect. That’s a lot of balderdash.

  • Joe

    Thomas, I did not tell you what you must or must not publish. I merely said that you do not need to publish since you had said that you did not want to interact with me.
    I did not say that you are a joke, I actually said that your handling of Ephesians 1:4 was a joke. After reading your response to what I wrote I can see that you cannot show that it refers only to election unto blessing.

    You said;

    If God foreknew who would believe in Him and be saved, and accordingly choose them to be holy and blameless in his sight, then He must have foreknown who would NOT believe in Him and accordingly NOT choose them to be holy and blameless in his sight. Dave Hunt says the following in his book “What Love is This?” and I agree with him.

    That contradicts your stance of God’s knowledge being changeable. If God in eternity past saw that some would not believe in Him and did not choose them to be holy and blameless in His sight as Dave Hunt says, then how is it possible for those same, people to believe the One who has seen their unbelief in eternity past? If they can do that then what is the point of God’s election in eternity past?

    I cannot see how the kai particles in Rom 8:30 disassociate God’s predestination from the rest of His actions (calling, justification etc), which are all in the aorist tense by the way, since predestination is tied to God’s foreknowledge in the previous verse 29 by the exact same adjunct particle.

  • Joe,

    Do you believe that man has a free will to choose either for or against God? I can’t remember whether you’d already explained your stance on free-will in previous comments.

    I have already related to you the incident of Jonah and Nineveh. God knew in his foreknowledge that He would destroy Nineveh and all its inhabitants unless they repented of their evil ways. God would never have given them an ultimatum if there hadn’t been a possibility for them to either choose to repent or not. They were given a choice and it was this choice that ultimately decided whether God was going to destroy them or not. Or was it his foreknowledge that literally forced them to repent? In other words, they had no other option but to repent because if they hadn’t it would have jeopardized God’s knowledge (foreknowledge).Were all the inhabitants, including the King of Nineveh God’s elect? If not, they could not have been saved, according to your estimate.

    I ask again and please answer me. The ultimate test for Ephesians 1:4 is whether it harmonizes with other passages on salvation and if not you must reject the Calvinistic view. Does it harmonize with passages like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2? Please answer my question.

  • Mark

    You are condemning those who believe the gospel of Jesus Christ to hell? You evidently don’t believe the gospel you claim to believe if that is the case. According to your interpretation of Rom 11:28 I am to include all of Israel when I read about election? Yet Rom 11:5 tells us there is only a remnant within Israel according to the election of grace. Then in Rom 11:7 we read that Israel has not obtained salvation but the elect have. So your interpretation is wrong.

    You havn’t proved anything to me. Your interpretations of Scripture are not solid and clearly guided by your hatred of “Calvinism.” God forbid that I should enter into a fruitless debate with you. I will not treat you with the same condemnation you have treated me with. If you have truly believed the gospel you are saved and a child of God, whether you believe in election or not. May God grant you repentance that you would not condemn those who belong to Christ.

    “Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.” (Rom 8:33,34)

    Goodbye. You shall be as an unbeliever to me, unless you repent. I wish you every blessing of grace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

  • Mark

    I am not condemning anyone. You are condemning yourself when you believe you are saved because you are allegedly one of the elect.

    Read Romans 11:28 again and this time remove your Calvinistic glasses so that you may understand it.

    1) With regard to the Gospel of Jesus Christ they are enemies of God.
    2) With regard to election they are still God’s beloved people for the sake of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    Romans 11:5 confirms that God has chosen the Jews for a special blessing and service (to bring the Messiah into the world – John 4:22). Whenever you see the word “election” your mind tells you it is election unto salvation. You have no clue what true election is. The Olive Tree in Romans 11:17 is NOT Jesus Christ. He is the Vine and not the Olive Tree (John 15:5). The Olive Tree is the Jewish patriarchal fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If Jesus was the Olive Tree, it would mean you can lose your salvation which would contradict your own Calvinistic beliefs.

    Who are the children of the kingdom in Matthew 8:12 – the Jehovah’s Witnesses? You must be kidding.

    You have proved to me that I am correct in saying that Calvinism is the greatest God-sent delusion of all time. I have not treated you with condemnation. God himself condemns heresy.

    But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8-9)

  • timothy gill

    The damnable cult of calvin has ensnared many souls.John calvin was a psychopath

  • Joe

    Thomas, thank you for the reply. I have been occupied by life and so have not gotten around to answer you. I will certainly like to answer the questions relating to Ephesians 1:4. I will tell you how I harmonize these passages in the next day or three.

    You wrote;

    I ask again and please answer me. The ultimate test for Ephesians 1:4 is whether it harmonizes with other passages on salvation and if not you must reject the Calvinistic view. Does it harmonize with passages like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2? Please answer my question.

    This actually means nothing since I can just as easily say that the ultimate test for John 3:16 and the like is that they must harmonize with the soteriological verses dealing with election. By the way I do not believe that John 3:16 is speaking to the elect only.

    I would really appreciate it if you could point me to something dealing with how you view the ecclesia and presbuteros (elders). I am trying to get different perspectives. I am not part of a local body.

  • Joe wrote:

    “By the way I do not believe that John 3:16 is speaking to the elect only.”

    If John 3:16 is not speaking to the “elect” only, it must be speaking to the entire human race which means everyone has the ability to either believe or not to believe. It’s a choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with election but man’s choice to believe or not to believe. “And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me.” (John 16:8-9). He does not say “because they are not the elect.”

    I am not going to answer any of your other questions until you have given me an answer to my question about Jonah and Nineveh.

    I don’t understand your question about the “ecclesia” and “presbuteros.” Please explain in more detail.

  • Joe

    If God had seen in eternity past that Nineveh would not repent then they would not have repented. Since they did repent that means that God knew that to be the outcome in eternity past. There was nothing else that could have happened.
    Mixing physical destruction of the OT with spiritual salvation of the NT and equating that to NT election based on the cross of Christ is just plain confusion. Get your dispensations right.

  • Joe,

    So you refuse to believe that it was Nineveh’s free-will choice to repent that caused God to spare them?

    You wrote:

    Mixing physical destruction of the OT with spiritual salvation of the NT and equating that to NT election based on the cross of Christ is just plain confusion. Get your dispensations right.

    No sir, you must get your Gospel right. You obviously are confused about the Gospel. This is surely the silliest thing you have said since our debate started.

    First of all Jonah presents the Gospel in a nutshell. “For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40)

    Do you really think the physical destruction of Nineveh had nothing to do with its inhabitants’ eternal destination? Do you really think if they hadn’t repented of their evil ways and consequently God exterminated them and their city that they would be in heaven right now? In that case, the physical destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing to do with spiritual salvation either. Let me remind you. Dying in your sin leads to eternal destruction in hell (John 8:21)

    I sincerely hope you would grow up and begin to think like a mature man instead of like a naughty kid.

    When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. (1 Co 13:11)

    I really am becoming sick and tired of your childish ramblings.

  • davidbrainerd2

    Because Calvinists opposed repentance, confession, and baptism for the remission of sins as the response to the gospel (despite it being biblical) the Baptists ended up replacing all of that with a modern invention called “the sinner’s prayer”…then Calvinists began attacking that too, because they want there to be NO response to the gospel. After all, their doctrine says God does it all for you. Its time for Baptists to grow a brain and return to the biblical model of people getting baptized instantly after confessing their faith in Jesus, as was done in Acts. No more having them pray the sinner’s prayer and then discouraging them from getting baptized, telling them to wait 5 years of whatever. Just kick the Calvinists out already, or at the very least, stop listening to them, and go read Acts.

  • coolCalvinist

    Please do not believe this horrible mischaracterization of what Calvinists believe. There are so many lies and falsehoods here. I as a calvinist (and formerly armenian) am offended at this hate piece. I can imagine that a piece like this would come from an Athiest attacking Christianity but not from fellow brothers and sisters. This does not seek to unify the body of Christ only to tear it apart. Calvinists are christians just like armenians. God sends no one to hell (there sin does). PERIOD. We still believe you have to have faith! The problem of child rap is not a Calvinist problem. It is a problem for all of those who believe God is sovereign. How could a good God allow that evil to happen? Also God choose Abraham, Isaac (not Ishmael), Jacob, Israel, and the Disciples, but for some reason when comes to God opening the eyes of Christians so that they can have faith that is when we get all upset. God chooses so that his purpose in election would stand (disagree with that well here is a verse that says that) Romans 9:11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[d] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” No man can come to God unless he draws him ie. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, disciples were all called and sought out by God and also had faith. They were not seeking God 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

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Dear CoolCalvinist

    This is the problem with Calvinists, they actually believe the doctrine of Calvinism is Christian when its not. And in doing so can say things like “I can imagine that a piece like this would come from an Athiest attacking but not from fellow brothers and sisters.” and “This does not seek to unify the body of Christ only to tear it apart.” How can articles that warn people against the horrendous dangers of the doctrine of demons Calvinism do harm to the Body of Christ? Quite the contrary, it’s saving people from hell.

    Yes there might be Christians that hold onto the doctrine of Calvinism at this moment in time who still need to hear the truth about their Salvation trashing gospel, and when they hear the truth the Holy Spirit does a wondrous work in them that God opens their eyes to the truth and they are set free from this cult.

    Tell me CoolCalvinist, how do you know you are Elect? Is it because you believe in Jesus Christ, or is it because you believe in the ‘doctrines of grace’? If you say the doctrines of grace, then tell me can a Calvnist minister be a Freemason and a Calvinist at the same time? Most surely its is so, because that minister (John MacArthur) believes in the doctrines of grace through and through, therefore he MUST be Elect. And if he is Elect, who are you to say otherwise – It’s God’s sovereign decree that this minister be Elect because he upholds TULIP to the last letter.

  • coolCalvinist

    Deborah are you serious? Believing a doctrine does not save YOU!!! Romans 10;9 tells you how to be saved. I know I am elect the same you can know you are saved. The holy spirit testifies of this to me and so does scripture that I am saved. The only reason I am saved is because of the Grace of God. ie Ephesians 1:4-5 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will. You have not dealt at all with the scriptural evidence I have raised that clearly says that God has predestined us (who are saved or elect) to salvation. That verse and other clearly states it. Calvinism or believing the opposite about the doctrines of grace DOES NOT SAVE you! Believing in Jesus and his resurrection does.

  • coolCalvinist

    As a side note. The vitriol and contempt that brothers and sisters in Christ are having for one other over a doctrinal (not an issue of how to be saved) dispute is truly upsetting. Calling people demons and things like that has no place in the body of Christ. Why can’t we have a friendly discussion? I Corinthians 13 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 cIf I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned but have not love, I gain nothing.

  • coolCalvinist,

    “God sends no one to hell (there sin does). PERIOD?” Really? And you call yourself a coolCalvinist? Really??? Do you realize how exceptionally beautiful you are contradicting yourself? First you say sin sends people to hell, not God, and then you quote Romans 9:11 which – according to Calvinists – means that the two twins’ destinies were sovereignly determined by God even before either one of them sinned. Isaac made it to heaven because he was chosen by God unto salvation before the foundation of the world long before his existence and capacity to sin and Esau was cast into hell because he was chosen by God unto damnation before the foundation of the world, long before his existence and capacity to sin. And yet you dare say, “God sends no one to hell (there sin does). PERIOD?” I have always maintained that Calvinists are a confused bunch of hypocrites who have no clue what Calvinism is all about.

    Why do you make such a fuss about God having hated Esau? Don’t you know that you are commanded to hate your wife?

    Luke 14:26
    (26) If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

    I am sick and tired of Calvinists who willy-nilly copy other Calvinists and quote the same old verses they do without checking out other verses that elucidate them. Why don’t you also quote John 12:32 in stead of only John 6:44?

    John 12:32
    (32) And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

    Ah, but you don’t believe this because your hellish doctrines of grace teach you that the word “all” refers only to the elect. It is because of this madness that these following verses apply to you as well.

    2 Timothy 3:5-7
    (5) Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. [In other words, don;t call them your brothers and sisters in Christ].
    (6) For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
    (7) Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. [They all love to quote certain verses over and over again without knowing what they really mean].

    2 Peter 3:15-16
    (15) And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
    (16) As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

    If you think I should call a serial killer (John Calvin) who mislead and still is misleading millions of people into the pit of hell, my brother in Christ, then you should visit your nearest shrink at your earliest convenience.

    You said: ” We still believe you have to have faith!”

    Are you sure you know Calvinism? Who’s the “we?” John MacArthur says:

    How can a person who is dead in sin, blinded by Satan, unable to understand the things of God, and continuously filled with evil suddenly exercise saving faith? A corpse could no sooner come out of a grave and walk.

    This “great Calvinist” obviously does not agree with you.

    Steele and Thomas argue that-

    “The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God…. Consequently…it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation…but is God’s gift to the sinner….”

    These “great Calvinists” obviously do not agree with you. Yet when Paul and Silas said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31), were they suggesting that by believing the Philippian jailor would contribute faith to his salvation? Hardly.

  • coolCalvinist,

    Do your really think atheists would quote this form the Bible?

    2 Thessalonians 2 verses 8 to 12.

    And then the lawless one (the antichrist) will be revealed and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of His mouth and bring him to an end by His appearing at His coming. The coming [of the lawless one, the antichrist] is through the activity and working of Satan and will be attended by great power and with all sorts of [pretended] miracles and signs and delusive marvels—[all of them] lying wonders—And by unlimited seduction to evil and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing (going to perdition because they did not welcome the Truth but refused to love it that they might be saved.Therefore God sends upon them a misleading influence, a working of error and a strong delusion to make them believe what is false, In order that all may be judged and condemned who did not believe in [who refused to adhere to, trust in, and rely on] the Truth, but [instead] took pleasure in unrighteousness. (AMP)

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    Deborah are you serious? Believing a doctrine does not save YOU!!!

    Really? What does this passage from Scripture mean to you?

    2 John 1:9
    (9) Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

    No one can claim to be saved if they do not abide in the doctrine of Christ. It’s as simple as that. And the doctrine of election or predestination unto salvation is NOT the doctrine of Christ. It is another Gospel of another Jesus and another spirit. Election in the Bible is NEVER unto salvation but always unto blessing and service. That’s why Paul wrote:

    Rom 11:28-29
    (28) As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
    (29) For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

    God will never retract his election unto service and blessing.

  • coolCalvinst

    Judas was also chosen (elected) by Christ and is now in hell.

    The entire nation of Israel is God’s elect and yet most of them are going to hell.

    You wrote:

    Calvinism or believing the opposite about the doctrines of grace DOES NOT SAVE you! Believing in Jesus and his resurrection does.

    The devils also believe in Jesus and his resurrection and they tremble.

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    Calling people demons and things like that has no place in the body of Christ.

    You’d better take this up with Jesus and rebuke Him very harshly because He said to Peter:

    Mat 16:23
    (23) But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men

    True love is not about having a friendly discussion. True love is to warn those who are on the wrong road to hell while they think and believe they are on the right path.

    Pro 14:12
    (12) There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

    Calvinism is definitely the wrong track to be on.

    I think you should learn what true love is.

    Calvinism is not just a dispute over a silly little doctrine. The dispute is over the very essence of salvation. TULIP is not just a doctrine. It is Calvinism’s Magna Carte on how to be saved.

    .

  • coolCalvinist

    Let me clarify what I meant you have taken me out of context. 1. Believing in Calvinism or not does not determine your salvation. Calling upon Jesus Christ (or believing the doctrine of his life, death, and resurrection) is what saves you. Just like you can believe in a young or old earth and still be a Christian. The text does not say that God damns people to hell. Everyone is going to hell becuase of their sin. Another way to explain that verse is not that God sent him to hell before the world but that God chose not show grace to him. Please explain what that verse means then. On a side note God would be perfectly righteous in sending all of us to hell without giving us his son. WE ALL DESERVE HELL. God was gracious to some. Also later on in that passage in Romans 9 it says that God raised Pharoah up just so he could be glorified or show his power in his destruction. Also no where does it say that God elects people to hell, NO where does it say that election applies to those who are unsaved. Election only applies to salvation. The Bible (I have proved passages that no one wants to deal with) only says elect and predestined when it refers to those who are saved. Also faith is a gift. The Bible says it is where does it come from God, so that we can not boast that we found God but that he was gracious. Also God makes us alive and the scales fall off so that we can put our faith in him. He hands us the water, but we do take the drink. Stop saying what John MacArthur and others say I am my own man I am not arguing them, but rather what God says and his Bible. I am not a disciple of John Calvin, but of Jesus Christ. Frankly I don’t care if you say that John Calvin does disagree with me. I am not convinced of Calvinism because of John Calvin but the Bible that clearly says in the verses I listed earlier that God has chosen to save the elect before the foundation of the world and all means that it is no longer just for the Jews but for all mean. Whoever will believe on the name of the Lord will be saved. The only way that we can believe on him is if God opens their eyes and draws them.

  • coolCalvinist

    Also this very article shows Calvinism to be true. It says that God can send a great delusion to blind people so they cant see the truth, but that same God is not able or does not open peoples eyes so they can see the truth. It says God is sovereign over the Darkness placed upon people, but there is no way he is sovereign to bring them to light. It limits God. I believe he is sovereign over everything even salvation.

  • coolCalvinist

    man not mean*

  • coolCalvinist

    It is not the Magna Carta on how to be saved. It tells how we are saved from a behind the scenes perspective. Romans 10:9 tells us how to be saved. That is another mischaracterization of the doctrine.

  • coolCalvinist

    Thomas Lessing I would love to debate you about this.

  • coolCalvinist

    You have also mischaracterized calvinists severly. We do believe in the same gospel and the same Jesus. The question is not over who Jesus is, but rather how salvation works. I believe that to be saved you have to call upon the name of the Lord. again Romans 10:9 tells us exactly how to be saved and if we could step away from the Calvinism issue I am sure we would both agree on how to tell a person to get saved. We would not tell them you have to believe in Calvinism to be saved.

  • Jumpy

    Tom,
    Reading through the above exchange of comments, may I draw your attention to John 12.32?
    “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men into me.”
    The “ALL” in this verse means (WITHOUT exception) ALL men- Jews and Gentiles alike (all from gentile/heathen nations-the world over), these are men and women of ALL nations and races , they WILL be drawn to Him. As the Saviour was about to be “lifted up”, because of the national rejection of the Jewish Messiah, salvation went beyond the shores of Israel, to the four corners of the globe.
    The “ALL” in this verse, as you would seem to imply does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child since Adam; however can it? It would make so much in the Scriptures to be contradictory.
    We need only, just for ONE example, refer to Luke 21.17; “And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake.” Does this verse mean that the Saviour will be hated by EVERY man, woman, and child, (without exception) including you and me?
    Now, I certainly hope that you will reject such a foolish notion?

  • coolCalivinst wrote:

    Let me clarify what I meant you have taken me out of context. 1. Believing in Calvinism or not does not determine your salvation.

    I understood you perfectly well. You said doctrine does not save and when I quoted to you 2 John verse 9 you suddenly changed your tune. You cannot be saved unless you know, understand and respond in faith to the doctrine of Christ. Calvinists teach that because of man’s total inability to hear, understand and respond in faith to the Gospel message (Christ’s doctrine), the elect need to be regenerated monergistically and then be gifted with faith AFTER they had been unilaterally saved by God. Indeed, this does not determine you salvation. It keeps you far away from salvation. That’s why Jesus said to the Pharisees who also believed in election and predestination.

    Mat 23:13
    (13) But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

    You wrote:

    Calling upon Jesus Christ (or believing the doctrine of his life, death, and resurrection) is what saves you.

    Yes, calling on the Name of the Lord for you salvation leads to salvation. it is not salvation per se. It leads to salvation But how can you call on Him when you are taught you are so completely dead in sins and transgressions that you cannot hear, understand or respond in faith to the Gospel (doctrine of Christ). Read here, if you will.

    You wrote:

    The text does not say that God damns people to hell. Everyone is going to hell becuase of their sin. Another way to explain that verse is not that God sent him to hell before the world but that God chose not show grace to him.

    Let’s get this straight. You say man is responsible for his own entrance into hell because God decided to withhold his grace from the reprobate. You are contradicting the Bible and putting Jesus Christ in the same corner as Satan who is the father of all lies. You are making Jesus a liar.

    Tit 2:11
    (11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

    Jesus never said that people go to hell because of their sin. If that were true, everyone one would have been cast into hell because all have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23) He said:

    John 16:8-9
    (8) And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
    (9) Of sin, because they believe not on me;

    .

    You wrote:

    Please explain what that verse means then. On a side note God would be perfectly righteous in sending all of us to hell without giving us his son. WE ALL DESERVE HELL. God was gracious to some.

    That’s where you are wrong. God is NOT gracious to some and not others. He is gracious to all men (Titus 2:11). All men have an equal opportunity to be saved (Romans 1:18-19) but most people are going to hell – not because God chose to withhold his grace from them, but – because of their unbelief. They choose not to believe on Him and consequently die in their sins.

    You wrote:

    Also later on in that passage in Romans 9 it says that God raised Pharoah up just so he could be glorified or show his power in his destruction. Also no where does it say that God elects people to hell, NO where does it say that election applies to those who are unsaved. Election only applies to salvation.

    You just love to contradict yourself, don’t you? First you say the verse does not teach that God elects people to hell and then you refer to Pharaoh to prove that God elected him for destruction. Make up your mind.

    God did NOT raise Pharaoh up for destruction. He knew even before the foundation of the world that Pharaoh would remain adamant to obey his commands and decided to use his rebellion to achieve his will with Israel. He did not make Pharaoh for the purpose of casting him into hell and everlasting destruction. Anyone who persists in hardening his heart and refuses to obey God will eventually have his heart hardened even more by God Himself. If you study the different words used for “hardening” you will see that Pharaoh hardened his own heart right from the beginning and when he refused to listen God assisted him in the hardening of his heart. God does not need to destroy human being to show his power. He destroyed Egypt’s idols to show his power.

    What do you mean by “election only applies to salvation?” The Calvinist doctrine of election and predestination applies to both salvation and reprobation. If election applied only to salvation, it would follow that the entire Jewish nation would be saved, including Judas Iscariot.

    Mat 8:11-12
    (11) And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
    (12) But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

    You wrote:

    he Bible (I have proved passages that no one wants to deal with) only says elect and predestined when it refers to those who are saved. Also faith is a gift.

    If faith is a gift and He only grants the so-called elect this gift, how on earth can you say election applies only to salvation? Aren’t those from who He withholds this gift bound for hell because He chooses not to give them this gift? IN any case, the gift in Ephesians 2: 8 and 9 is eternal life which is granted to those who believe on Jesus Christ. Anyone is capable to believe or nor to believe (Remember John 16:8-9?).

    You wrote:

    The Bible says it is where does it come from God, so that we can not boast that we found God but that he was gracious.

    Of course it is by grace alone through faith alone that sinners are saved. (Titus 2:11). So, where is the election and predetermination in this? Those who are saved through faith are not boasting. In fact, they are affirming that man cannot save himself and needs Jesus Christ to save them.

    You wrote:

    Also God makes us alive and the scales fall off so that we can put our faith in him.

    Answer me this. Do you believe that God first regenerated you without having to put your faith in Jesus and then AFTER your monergistic regeneration He gave you the gift of faith so that you may believe OR did you first believe on Him and then were saved?

    You wrote:

    Stop saying what John MacArthur and others say I am my own man I am not arguing them, but rather what God says and his Bible. I am not a disciple of John Calvin, but of Jesus Christ. Frankly I don’t care if you say that John Calvin does disagree with me. I am not convinced of Calvinism because of John Calvin but the Bible that clearly says in the verses I listed earlier that God has chosen to save the elect before the foundation of the world and all means that it is no longer just for the Jews but for all mean. Whoever will believe on the name of the Lord will be saved. The only way that we can believe on him is if God opens their eyes and draws them.

    That’s where you are wrong. The Bible NEVER teaches election and predestination unto salvation. It teaches that all people have the very same opportunity to be saved but most are not saved because of their unbelief and NOT because they hadn’t been elected or predestined unto salvation. That’s a gross misrepresentation of the God of the Bible and of his love. In fact, it is an idol. You cannot say “whoever will believe on the Name of the Lord will be saved” and in the same breath say He withholds his grace and the gift of faith from most people. That’s ludicrous. It borders on spiritual schizophrenia.

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    Also this very article shows Calvinism to be true. It says that God can send a great delusion to blind people so they cant see the truth, but that same God is not able or does not open peoples eyes so they can see the truth. It says God is sovereign over the Darkness placed upon people, but there is no way he is sovereign to bring them to light. It limits God. I believe he is sovereign over everything even salvation.

    No, that’s not what I said in this article. I said that anyone who persists in twisting God’s doctrine of salvation is in danger of having their eyes and hearts blinded so that He may judge them accordingly. You are twisting God’s doctrine of salvation by saying that God withholds his grace from some people.

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    man not mean*

    Yeah, I noticed that. In the same way you can say “faith in Jesus Christ saves and NOT election and predestination.”

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    Rom 10:9
    (9) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

    The verse does not say you ARE saved when you believe these things. It says you SHALL be saved IF and when you call on the Name of the Lord (verse 13).

    When, how and where was Paul saved? Do you mind telling us?

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    Thomas Lessing I would love to debate you about this.

    I have debated many Calvinists (even “cool” ones) and I can assure you it’s a waste of time because the blindness Satan has pulled over their eyes is so strong that they cannot or rarely see the light. Election and predestination is their God and not the God of the Bible. It’s even worse than the Word of Faith blindness.

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    You have also mischaracterized calvinists severly. We do believe in the same gospel and the same Jesus. The question is not over who Jesus is, but rather how salvation works. I believe that to be saved you have to call upon the name of the Lord. again Romans 10:9 tells us exactly how to be saved and if we could step away from the Calvinism issue I am sure we would both agree on how to tell a person to get saved. We would not tell them you have to believe in Calvinism to be saved.

    “The question is not over who Jesus is . . .???” Really??? If that was so unimportant Jesus would never have asked his disciples “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” and “But whom say ye that I am?” Wow, coolCalivinst, you are beginning to show your true colours more and more and I am beginning to get worried more and more. Think before you speak, my friend, because you and I are going to have to give an account of every word that proceeds from our mouths.

    Romans 10:9 does not tell you how to be saved. It tells you what God’s condition is for you to be saved. Verse 13 tells you how to be saved.

  • Jumpy wrote,

    The “ALL” in this verse means (WITHOUT exception) ALL men- Jews and Gentiles alike (all from gentile/heathen nations-the world over), these are men and women of ALL nations and races , they WILL be drawn to Him. As the Saviour was about to be “lifted up”, because of the national rejection of the Jewish Messiah, salvation went beyond the shores of Israel, to the four corners of the globe.
    The “ALL” in this verse, as you would seem to imply does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child since Adam; however can it? It would make so much in the Scriptures to be contradictory.

    If “ALL” in this verse means “without exception” it follows that it refers to every single human being because “Jews and Gentiles alike” refers to every single human being, unless there are other distinctions made between men in Scripture, other than Jews and Gentiles – for instance Jews and Gentiles and aliens. One may assume that “all” does not refer to every single human being if aliens formed part of the human race, which would then follow that “Jews and Gentiles alike” does not make up the entire world because there are also aliens among them. That’s preposterous.

    So now Luke 21:17 proves that Jesus lied. And of course “world” in John 3:16 also does not refer to all men but only “all men without exception” and “Jews and Gentiles alike.” Who are those who are not included in the “Jews and Gentiles alike” for whom Christ did not die? Are you a Jew or a Gentile or an alien?

    1Ti 2:3-6
    (3) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
    (4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
    (5) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
    (6) Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

    Stop twisting Scriptures to your own destruction.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    coool Calvinist

    >> Calling people demons

    Where did anyone call someone a demon? Eh? now you are lying. A Calvinist believes in a doctrine of demons, but calling someone a demon? really…

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    CoolCalvinist

    I think we shall call you confusedCalvinist because you don’t understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, and then to top it off you don’t actually understand Calvinism.

  • coolCalvinist

    This is my last post. I just want to say a few things in conclusion. First I am a christian, and I know this because of the holy spirit living in me and the scriptures. And vs. 9 does tell you how to be saved I will walk you through it. First it says “that if you confess with you mouth that Jesus Lord” I have confessed through prayer(calling on the name of the Lord) and to others about the Lordship of Jesus. Second it says “and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead” I believe and have faith that God raised him from the dead. Lastly it says “you will be saved” Since I have met the prior verses requirements, I know that I am saved. I may be wrong on Calvinism but I Know that according to God’s word I am saved ie a Christian. I could be wrong about a bunch of things, but I know when it comes to my salvation ie. being a Christian I certain about that.
    The last thing I am going to say about Calvinism is simply this (I may be misunderstanding Calvin, but I am not a student of him, but rather God’s word) It clearly says in Ephesians 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5: he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, This verse clearly says that he chose us (elect, christians). It also says in Romans 8:29-30 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. It says those whom he foreknew he also…. This means that not only did he know he also predestined. Predestined first, then God calls them (inward spiritual call not the outward general call) Those that he predestined and called he also justifies, Those that God predestined he calls and he justifies and he glorifies. He does not just foreknow who will call on him he is an active force behind it. I believe this not because John Calvin helped flesh this out. I believe it because the Bible clearly says that he “chose” us. He clearly “chose” the disciples. He clearly “chose” Abraham. He clearly “chose” Isaac and not Ishmael. He clearly “chose” Jacob and not Esau. Frankly I probably should not call myself a calvinist. I am convinced by the scripture. The problem is not that the Bible says nothing about election, and we are putting that into scripture. The problem is that the Bible clearly says that God chose us (christians, church, elect, etc) and you choose simply to not believe what is plainly there. Therefore you have to justify and try to explain around it. It does not matter what the Bible says you are dead set against it. Even if the Bible clearly said that God chose us before the world for salvation. Or that those he foreknow he predistined he called and saved and he will finish it. (Oh wait it does clearly say that Eph. 1:4 or Romans 8:29) The problem is not that there is not evidence for Calvinism the problem is you have made yourself the judge of scripture and not the holy spirit. The problem with this is that you refuse to see the evidence, and the problem is not a lack of it.
    Also I would like to thank you for this discussion. I appreciate your time and what sacrifice you make to reply.
    The reason I am leaving after this post is because of the lack of love and respect that has been shown.
    Jesus says that the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself. Whether I am right or wrong I am neighbor and a brother in the Lord, and the disrespect you have showed your brothers in the Lord is shameful. You should be encouraging and show love. IF you refuse to believe my previous passages read this verse I Corinthians 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. Even if your are right the way you have gone about this has been sinful. I am only saying this because I hope you change your approach and can deal with people more nicely. At this point test your heart I am sure you are already thinking of a response to justify your actions. If/so (only you know the truth) you heart is hardened to the scriptures and when you are rebuked in love by a brother. Neither are good things. I would really love to see you debate some of the famous people you have said things about. James White I believe would be more than willing. I love you brother and pray for the success of your ministry, and that God will lead us both in to truth. Please hear that I am not being mean or hateful. I believe as a Christian we should approach topics in a loving matter and even if we cannot win their minds we should win their hearts.

    PS Deborah where in the Bible does it tell you to mock people, or call them names ie confusedCalvinist? Even if someone is wrong we are still supposed to love them. The arrogance and vitriol you have showed is un-christian. So as much as you may be right you have failed at first loving your neighbor.

    I leave you with this John13:34 “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35″By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

    I hope that God blesses you and guides you all, I bow out because I will not participate in the ungodliness which has been done here on either side.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Confused Calvinist (because this is what you are, I am not name calling I am stating a fact.)

    Please read this article to understand Predestination and Election. This is the truth: What it Really Means to be Elected, Chosen, and Predestinated – The Biblical Truth

    >> The problem is that the Bible clearly says that God chose us (christians, church, elect, etc) and you choose simply to not believe what is plainly there.

    See what I mean about confused? First you say we have no free will, then you say we simply choose to not believe. Oh coolcalvinist, I pray God opens your eyes to the truth that Calvinism is a lie from the pit of hell. Please read that above article to understand what is means to be chosen – biblical predestination.

  • coolCalvinist

    I never said anything about free-will. I said that you choose not to believe the evidence I have presented to you where it clearly says that God chose before the world for salvation. I did not say anything about free will. I did not say you can see the truth of salvation but choose not to believe it. You are the one who is confused and you have put words in my mouth.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    coolcalvinist

    Calvinists believe you do NOT have free will. How can we choose to believe your so called evidence when we are reprobates doomed for hell? God has not regenerated my soul ‘according to Calvinist doctrine which you believe’ so right now I can’t believe anything you say because I am as dead as a door nail.

    Are you going to read that article or not?

  • coolCalvinist,

    How can a Calvinist never say anything about free-will? Free-will and its complete absence in man is one of the main topics of discussion of any Calvinist, especially when they are cool.

    The Bible never once teaches that God chose before the world for salvation. It clearly says that “Those whom He foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” Those whom He knew beforehand would respond in faith to his Gospel and be saved He ALSO (note the word “ALSO”) predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.”

    The predestination is unto blessing and NOT unto salvation. If predestination were unto salvation it would contradict many passages in Scriptures which clearly teach that God wants all men to be saved and not only the so-called elect. (1 Timothy 2:3-4). You are the one who’s putting words in God’s mouth and that’s exceptionally dangerous.

    Answer me this: Did Jesus die for all men or only for the so-called elect?

  • coolCalvinist wrote:

    First it says “that if you confess with you mouth that Jesus Lord” I have confessed through prayer(calling on the name of the Lord) and to others about the Lordship of Jesus.

    Your confession made you a Christian? Really? A confession that Jesus is Lord means absolutely nothing.

    Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:21-23)

    coolCalvinist wrote:

    Second it says “and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead” I believe and have faith that God raised him from the dead.

    The devil and his angels also believe that God raised Jesus from the dead and they tremble.

    coolCalvinist wrote:

    The reason I am leaving after this post is because of the lack of love and respect that has been shown.

    I can assure you that we truly love you – not with a soppy kind of love. If we hadn’t loved you we wouldn’t have warned you against the heresies taught in Calvinism.

    There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. (Proverbs 14:12)

    The fact that you teach men the heresies contained in Calvinism shows that you do not love them. If you truly loved Jesus and your fellowmen you would have obeyed Jesus who said:

    He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. (John 21:17)

    You’re not feeding God’s sheep and lambs with good and wholesome biblical food. You are feeding them poison. Is that love? Are you crazy? Repent of your evil before it’s too late.

    You wrote:

    I hope that God blesses you and guides you all, I bow out because I will not participate in the ungodliness which has been done here on either side.

    Isn’t that just so kosher. You don’t want to participate in ungodliness but as a coolCalvinist you want to participate in the doctrines of a serial killer who taught his disciples (like you) that God does not love all people and that his Son died only for the elect. Do you call that love?

    Keep your blessing to yourself. First you bless us and then you curse us. What kind of blessing is that.

    Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. (2 Corinthians 13:5)

  • Jumpy

    Tom,
    Clearly you are wrong. If God “wants all men to be saved and not only the so-called elect.” 1 Timothy 2.3-4, as you quote, then, if God is sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, then has He not failed miserably? Because you well know that “all men” will not be saved. Clearly the “elect” WILL be saved, He has chosen them unto salvation, Ephesians 1.4, 2 Thessalonians 2.13 etc.
    What “God wants”, or desires, will certainly come to pass-Job 23.13?

  • Jumpy,

    Of course all men won’t be saved – not because they hadn’t been elected but because of their unbelief and rejection of Jesus Christ.

    You say, “clearly the ‘elect’ will be saved.” WRONG! The majority of the elect are going to hell.

    As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. (Romans 11:28)./

    And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom [the elect] shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 8:11-12).

    Job 23:13 doesn’t in the very least refer to salvation.

    2 Thessalonians 2:13 does not refer to salvation from eternal destruction to eternal salvation. It refers to the final salvation of all God’s saints mortal bodies unto the reception of their immortal bodies at the Rapture. This is called the salvation though sanctification of the Spirit. The salvation from death to life is not through the sanctification of the Spirit. It is through faith in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross. Sanctification follows the new birth which ultimately leads to the saints’ final salvation at the Rapture. But you don’t believe in the Rapture, do you?

    The context is Ephesians 1 is blessing and not salvation. Paul actually says, “According to all the spiritual blessings all believers have already received in the heavenly places in Christ, He has chosen them to be holy and without blame before Him in love here on earth.” It simply says: “Because you have already been blessed with all the spiritual blessing in heaven in Jesus Christ, live and walk in a way that is fitting to this heavenly reality, which is to be holy and without blame while you are still on earth.”

    Explain to me this verse in the light of your statement, “then has He not failed miserably?”

    Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God. (Isaiah 49:4).

    In what way does this verse prove that God never fails?

  • Jumpy

    Tom,
    In Isaiah 49, the Bible tells us that Christ here addresses “the Isles”. It is a Word from Him to the Gentiles, telling them how He had been “called”; speaking of His incarnation and of being made like a sharp sword; a polished shaft hid in the quiver all ready for use though not as yet brought out, which is His present condition and attitude, Isaiah 49.1-2. In verse 3, He speaks of being the One in Whom His Father will be glorified-the Israel representatively of His people-and then shows how, if that were God’s only thought respecting Him, it had FAILED, for Israel was not gathered; yet nevertheless, expressing His confidence that “His reward was with Jehovah (verse 4)”.Then comes the answer of God (v.5,6), that He should be glorious in His eyes and also be a Light to lighten the Gentiles and for salvation to the ends of the earth”!
    And though “the One whom man despised and the NATION (Jews) abhorred”, He should yet be “One Whom kings should see and arise, and princes should worship v.7)”!
    This we know is yet future, but revealed now TO THE GENTILES, who ought therefore thus to own and acknowledge Him.
    I DO, CERTAINLY believe in “the rapture”, (but not the ‘any moment’ one, but ONLY as the Bible very CLEARLY teaches-AFTER ” the tribulation of those days…” Matthew 24.29, Mark 13.24,-THEN the millennial reign of Christ-the “Day of the Lord”.
    God NEVER fails!
    Praise His Holy Name!

  • Jumpy,

    You didn’t answer my question. The fact is, Israel as a nation is God’s elect and yet most of them are going to hell. (Romans 11:28; Matthew 8:12).

    Of course you must believe in the Rapture but not the “at any moment” one because the Bible clearly teaches the Rapture. The Rapture was disclosed to Paul, not Matthew. (1 Corinthians 15:51). So, for you to place the Rapture in Matthew 24 is futile. Moreover, Paul clearly says in 1 Corinthians 15 that those who are alive will be changed and raptured in the twinklink of an eye. Therefore, there won’t be any time for anyone to come down from the roof or out of the fields to gather anything from their homes. Therefore, the command not to try and take anything with them from their homes is rather silly when the Rapture proper involves a twinkling of an eye transrormation and a violent taking away. The word “harpazo” means to be seized and carried off by force. The ones taken have no control over their violent rapture. Those who are commanded not to return to their homes to gather anything from their homes will have control over the matter. They can either return to their homes to gather something and delay their flight into the mountains (take note: not into the air), or in obedience not to return to their homes and immediately flee into the mountains to escape the wrath of Antichrist. At any rate, Matthew says that the Jews in Judaea must flee into the mountains. Matthew says nothing about a rapture into the air.

    The Rapture cannot possibly take place at the end of the Tribulation and here is the reason why. In Matthew 24:15 Jesus says that the Antichrist is going to set up an abomination in the most holy of holies of the newly rebuilt tribulation temple in Jerusalem. This takes place in the middle of the seven years tribulation period and not at the end of it. (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15). It is at this point when the Jews will have to flee into the mountains to escape his wrath. Nothing is said about a Rapture into the air as Paul explains it in 1 Corinthians 15.

    Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. (Revelation 3:10).

  • Jumpy,

    In Isaiah 49, the Bible tells us that Christ here addresses “the Isles”.

    He does not only address the isles (Gentiles). His address is aimed particularly at the nation of Israel.

    And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength. (Isa 49:5)

    You should read the Bible correctly and not in a sloppy and fragmentary fashion.

  • Jumpy

    Sorry Tom,
    of course, regarding Israel, as you most correctly assert; “Israel as a nation is God’s elect and yet most of them are going to hell.”
    This statement of yours, none can argue against, the Scriptures do indeed most solemnly declare what you say to be so very true: Zechariah 13.8, and in Revelation 11.13, 16.18 etc. However, the Saviour God has a chosen remnant when He returns, Zechariah 12.10 and Zechariah 14.2, Jeremiah 31.9, Jesus Christ “shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob” and “I shall take away their sins.” Romans 11.26-27. It is He, the Lord, that does the converting.
    The aforementioned confirms the Scripture you quoted, “And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, TO BRING JACOB TO HIM,” Isaiah 49.5 (my emphasis). Israel as a nation are now back in the land albeit in unbelief, and in a soon coming Day, “all Israel shall be saved” (the nation and God’s elect) Romans 11.26.
    With respect, who is “reading in a “sloppy and fragmentary fashion”?
    We know that God caused Israel to “fail”, and because of Israel’s “failure”-salvation then became worldwide-to the four corners of the globe!
    A man with a not inconsiderable knowledge of the Bible that you have, would surely know all this?
    As regards the unbiblical pre-tribulation rapture theory, do you honestly think that unbelieving Jews will be reading Matthew 24 (much less heeding the Lord’s warnings!), or indeed any other part of the New Testament?
    “Matthew says nothing about a rapture into the air”? Matthew 24.31, describes this event. Where do you think the “elect” (chosen) of that verse will be going?

  • Jumpy,

    I proved to you that you cannot link Matthew 24 to 1 Corinthians 15 from verse 51 to 58. Matthew does not speak of a Rapture – a forced removal of those who will have no control over their departure from the earth into the air – as Paul describes it in 1 Corinthians 15. The Jews in Matthew will have total control over their flight into the mountains when Antichrist begins to persecute those who refuse to bow the knee before his abominable image in the most holy of holies in the tribulation temple. They will have the choice to either return to their homes from their roofs or fields to gather some possessions and then flee to the mountains or to flee immediately without returning to their homes. Hence the earnest warning NOT to return to their homes but to flee without delay. Jesus even urges them to pray that their flight should not take place on the Sabbath or in winter (Matthew 24:20). There is nothing of the kind in 1 Corinthians 15. Why? Because the in a moment transformation from an earthly body to a heavenly one – like unto that of Jesus – in the twinkling of an eye cannot possibly allow anyone to come down from the roof or from the fields to gather anything from their homes. Can’t you see that?

    You wrote:

    We know that God caused Israel to “fail”, and because of Israel’s “failure”-salvation then became worldwide-to the four corners of the globe!

    Of all the infamous lies Calvinism nestles in her bosom, this is the worst of all. Did God cause Israel to make a golden calf in the wilderness? Did He cause them to murmur at Kadesh-Barnea? Did He cause them to follow the idols of the pagan nations in Canaan and marry their women? Did He cause them to refuse to enter the Promised Land and conquer it as He promised? Take heed:

    Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20)

    You are making God of whom Jesus said “no one is good but God alone” bad and the cause of all Israel’s sins. That’s the worst kind of blasphemy imaginable.

    You wrote:

    As regards the unbiblical pre-tribulation rapture theory, do you honestly think that unbelieving Jews will be reading Matthew 24 (much less heeding the Lord’s warnings!), or indeed any other part of the New Testament?

    Every single Jew will know by way of all the signs given during the Tribulation that Christ’s return to earth (not the Rapture) is at the door. Some will be ready and others not. The ten virgin in Matthew 25 – five wise and five foolish – represent the Jews, some of whom will be ready (wise virgins with enough oil or the saved elect of Israel) and some who won’t be ready (five foolish virgins who lack oil, or the lost elect of Israel). The saved elect of Israel or the remnant as they are known will enter the Millennial Kingdom on earth whilst the lost elect Jews will be cast into sheol where the departed souls of the lost are kept until the final judgment. (White Throne Judgement in Revelation 20).

  • Jumpy

    Tom,
    As Luther said “free will is nothing”. Without doubt man is most definitely a free agent, or does have free will, in as much as we humans (“dust of the earth” Genesis 2.7, Psalm 103.14 etc.) can understand it to be (please remember, though we are made “in the image of God” Genesis 1.27, we are but “dust”?). But, God’s will IS sovereign! His will “will be done” Matthew 6.10, Luke 11.2 etc. His will is supreme? His will does NOT bend to ours, or if so, how ever could “His will be done”?
    To believe, just for one moment that man can thwart God’s will goes against Scripture in it’s entirety!
    Can you not see this?
    Jesus, God our Saviour IS the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” Revelation 13.8. God knows and predestines ALL things, if man’s ‘freewill’ was preeminent as you are asserting, then how ever could the Bible (unfulfilled prophecy) be written before time if God hadn’t predestined it? If ALL, yes ALL, events were left to man’s “free will”, then God’s Word, the Bible could NEVER have outlined the end from the beginning. The Bible’s prophetic parts could NEVER have been written, as God would still be waiting for “the dust of the ground” (man) to sovereignly arrange events for Him! Talk about putting the “cart before the horse”!
    Many trouble themselves with this- “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace and create evil: I the LORD do all these things” Isaiah 45.7, “Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?” Amos 3.6 (please read the context) will you still argue against God? “What doest thou?” Daniel 4.35. 4.35.
    The Scriptures CLEARLY teach that Antichrist will come BEFORE the “Day” of the Lord Jesus, and after “the falling away”-1 Thessalonians 2.3, the Saviour shall come AFTER and destroy him 2 Thessalonians 2.8.

    “Monster energy drink”, “Boshoff”, “Rensburg” etc, etc, etc.? “The whole world lieth in wickedness” 1 John 5.19.
    May God be pleased to bless your website.

  • Jumpy,

    As Luther said “free will is nothing”. Without doubt man is most definitely a free agent, or does have free will, in as much as we humans (“dust of the earth” Genesis 2.7, Psalm 103.14 etc.) can understand it to be (please remember, though we are made “in the image of God” Genesis 1.27, we are but “dust”?). But, God’s will IS sovereign! His will “will be done” Matthew 6.10, Luke 11.2 etc. His will is supreme? His will does NOT bend to ours, or if so, how ever could “His will be done”?

    If God’s will is being done on earth as it is in heaven, then heaven has already come to earth and we don’t need to pray “let thy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven” any longer. The fact that you believe God preordained everything – even the fall of Adam and Eve and Judas’ betrayal of Jesus Christ – proves that man can thwart God’s will. You are already thwarting God’s will when you blame Him for man’s sins. Not only that. It is blasphemy.

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20).

    The fact that God prophesied (predicted) that Judas would betray Jesus, does not mean that He caused Him to do it. Once again, that’s blasphemy.

    You wrote:

    Many trouble themselves with this- “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace and create evil: I the LORD do all these things” Isaiah 45.7, “Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?” Amos 3.6 (please read the context) will you still argue against God? “What doest thou?” Daniel 4.35. 4.35.

    It simply means that God’s perfect holiness, goodness, and moral disposition define and reveal what evil really is. His perfect oppositeness to sin and evil makes sin and evil (which find an occasion to exist in man’s ability to choose freely) to exist. We could never have known what evil and sin are if we didn’t have God’s perfect law. Paul says so in Romans 7. Darkness is nothing. It is merely the absence of light and it cannot be understood for what it really is if there was no light. In fact, it could not have existed at all. So in that sense, God creates darkness and evil – articulates its essence through his light and goodness.

    Daniel 4:35
    The punishment for sin and rebellion against God is inevitable. No one can prevent God from punishing man for his sins. That’s what Nebuchadnezzar meant when he said these words. Verse 37 clearly says so:

    Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase. (Daniel 4:37)

    It does not mean that God caused Him to sin and then punished him for it. Again, that’s blasphemy.

    Indeed, the entire world lies in the evil one. Does that mean God caused it to lie in the power of the evil one? Your admittance of the truth in 1 John 5:19 (2 Corinthians 4:4) undermines God’s sovereignty in a huge way. Is God the God of this world who causes everything to happen – even the most heinous sins – or is Satan, the god of this world who incites men to do the most heinous sins, or is it God who causes Satan to incite men to do the most heinous sins? Careful now. Think very hard before you blaspheme God again.

  • Jumpy,

    I never said that man’s will is preeminent. How do you expect to read and understand your Bible correctly if you can’t even read and understand my comments correctly?

    You wrote:

    If ALL, yes ALL, events were left to man’s “free will”, then God’s Word, the Bible could NEVER have outlined the end from the beginning.

    Where does the Bible say God “outlined” the end from the beginning? The word “nâgad” (declaring) in Isaiah 46:10 means to announce, to predict or to report on and NOT cause, ordain or predestine something to happen.

    Like all good Calvinists you are turning Almighty God into a fortune-teller or crystal gazer who are instruments in the hands of Satan. God’s foreknowledge is not based on Him having ordained or caused or predestined all things to happen. He did not say, “this and that is going to happen because I decreed or ordained all those things to happen.” That’s Satan’s modus operandi. He first inspires a fortuneteller to tell someone “you are going to meet a tall, dark and handsome man and fall in love with him” and then causes her to meet someone like that. Again, you are blaspheming God by suggesting that He works on the same principles as Satan.

    I can assure you that God is not pleased to bless your blasphemies. So I can’t say to you “May God be pleased to bless your doctrines.” That would be tantamount to bidding you Godspeed which I am forbidden to do (2 John 9-11) and I don’t want to be a partaker of your evil deeds.

  • Jumpy

    Tom,
    It is so very clear from your reply that you are not at all adhering to Scripture, but are using your own theological reasoning/rationale.
    You are so very quick to press the “blasphemy” button! Yet, all this without any Scriptural support, whatsoever.
    Isaiah 46.10, so clearly tells us among much else that God’s will is preeminent-His “will be done” Matthew 6.10, Luke 11.2, 22.42 etc. God’s will, and “ways” are far above ours- Isaiah 55.9. If you would read the immediate context of Isaiah 46.10 (the verses before, and after) you will learn that God says “I will DO all my pleasure…yea I have spoken it, I will also BRING it to pass, have purposed it, I will also DO it.”
    I do sincerely thank you for your replies, I have learnt much from them, though not in the ways you would hope, that much I am most sure!
    To comment, as you do, by saying;
    “You are blaspheming God, by suggesting that He works on the same principles as Satan” only goes to show your lack of knowledge of Scripture (theological bias?); God declares “…all things work together for good to them that love God..” Romans 8.28. The “All things” in this verse, are good and bad, without exception?
    God uses Satan for His own purposes, I hardly need to lecture you on this? Read, for just one example, Job 2.6, Satan could do nothing to Job, unless God permitted it-good or evil.
    Again, if God had to rely on man’s ‘freewill’, however could have the prophetic Word ever have been completed?

    More to the point, what are YOUR thoughts on the Reformation? Do you believe this was a mighty move of God?

  • Jumpy,

    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: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. (James 1:13-15)

    And yet you believe that God ordained all things, including the sins of Adam and Eve, Judas Iscariot, Adolf Hitler, and all the rest. That’s blasphemy, my friend, because you are attributing to God which is attributable only to Satan. I quoted to you 2 Corinthians 4:4 and asked you whether God caused Satan to become the god of this world or was it the free-willful sins of mankind that allowed him to become the god of this world? You are not answering my questions. Or shall I rather say you are trying to answer my questions by your willful (excuse the pun) twisting of Scripture.

    Isaiah 46:9-11
    What you are doing is to superimpose salvation (the Calvinistic view of election and predestination) on a single event in the history of Babylon when God decreed to punish the nations’ idolatry by bringing King Cyrus from the East to execute his righteous judgments on them (Isaiah 41). This is a good example of how God even uses unrighteous men (as He often uses Satan) to accomplish his will and to do all his pleasure in the affairs of men and future events (this has nothing to do with the salvation of man because He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked).

    Indeed all things – good and bad – work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:28). Paul is talking to believers, not unbelievers. So, how do you profess to connect this verse to the so-called reprobate whose destiny God decreed aeons ago and decided to send them to hell because it was supposedly his good pleasure to do so? By the way, what has fortunetelling – the example I used – got to do with Job?

    The prophetic Word could and has always been completed 100% every single time – not because God decreed things to happen and then caused it to happen – but because He is omnipotent and knew before the foundation of the world what every single person would think and do his/her entire life, and accordingly chose how He would use those persons. For example, He knew aeons ago that Pharaoh would harden his heart from the very beginning and accordingly used him (raised him up) to accomplish his will with the nation of Israel.

    Your view and that of Calvinism is blasphemous because you are making God the causative factor of everything that’s bad in the world, especially man’s sinful actions. And again, you cannot use Romans 8:28 to substantiate your blasphemous views.

    My thoughts on the Reformation? Many good things came from it but many bad things sneaked in unawares from Roman Catholicism. In fact, Calvin’s Institutes are replete with Augustinian Catholicism. This is what Luther said about predestination and I agree with him 100%.

    But it pleases me to take from this passage the opportunity to discuss doubt, God, and the will of God; for I hear that here and there among the nobles and persons of importance vicious statements are being spread abroad concerning predestination or God’s foreknowledge. For this is what they say: “If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works.” I would be glad to debate in detail against these wicked statements if the uncertain state of my health made it possible for me to do so. For if the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help? Therefore let us reject all this and tread it underfoot. (From the American Edition of Luther’s Works 5:43-50; Luther’s Genesis Commentary, commenting on Genesis 29:9). (Emphasis added)

    So you’d better decide (excuse the pun) whose reformation you want to follow – that of Martin Luther or John Calvin. Should it be Calvin’s then you’d better brace yourself for God’s righteous judgment on your choosing (excuse the pun) to do away completely with “the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection and all that He did for the salvation of the world.” In short, you must either tread underfoot Jesus Christ or the blasphemous doctrines of Calvinism. What’s it going to be? The choice is your’s (excuse the pun the umpteenth time).

  • Terry

    I was very pleased to find this article. For some time, I have been convinced that the doctrines of grace / Calvinism is the true understanding of the word of God. After reading this article, the incredible joy of knowing that it truly is the truth filled me with thankfulness to my Saviour and King, Jesus Christ, for shedding the light of the glory of His face upon me for revealing the truth of the doctrines of grace by His Holy Spirit. I will be returning to your site many times in the future to encourage myself that the doctrines of grace is the pure and holy word expounded in the scriptures. I don’t deserve to be favored by His love, yet, I am. I am not in any way pleased in considering the severe judgment of God that awaits you if you do not repent, but, I am very humbled that a sinner like me was given the grace to know the truth. If your demonic rant is used to encourage His sheep, all glory to His name.

  • Terry,

    TULIP is not the doctrines of grace. It is the DOCTRINES OF DISGRACE. If DISGRACE (shame, dishonour, ignomiony, scandal, degradation) encourages you, so be it.

    For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (2 Ti 3:6-7)

    Enjoy your deception.

  • Vanessa

    Good morning all…..Here is my take on Martin luther. LUTHER WAS AN ANTI-SEMITE.

    Here are some quite shocking quotes from Luther which show that he was a rabid anti-Semite:

    “The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows, seven times higher than ordinary thieves”

    “We ought to take revenge on the Jews and kill them.”

    “The blind Jews are truly stupid fools”

    “Now just behold these miserable, blind, and senseless people.”

    “eject them forever from this country”

    “they are nothing but thieves and robbers”

    “What then shall we do with this damned, rejected race of Jews?”

    “Such a desperate, thoroughly evil, poisonous, and devilish lot are these Jews”

    “They are the real liars and bloodhounds”

    “We are at fault for not slaying them.”

    “I shall give you my sincere advice: first to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them.”

    “Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.”

    “Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.”

    “Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them”

    “If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs”

    “If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the river Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words `I baptize thee in the name of Abraham’.”

    Martin Luther was not a Christian man, but, instead, he was a brutal man who persecuted the Jews unmercifully.

    The word of God calls Martin Luther a liar:

    1John 4:20- If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

    Martin luther was cursed by God. Genesis 12:3.

    And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

    Take care.

  • Vanessa

    It has come to my attention that Martin Luther repented of his hate towards the Jews. If this is the case does anyone have any written information for me . If so i will need to repent. I have researched but I cannot find it anywhere just people saying he repented. I fear God if I have judged the man incorrectly. Thank you.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Vanessa

    I have done some googling and I can’t find anywhere where it says he repented. If he did then great, however the entire Lutheran doctrine is Roman Catholic, did he repent of this?

  • Vanessa

    Thanks Debs.

  • Kathleen

    Vanessa wrote:

    It has come to my attention that Martin Luther repented of his hate towards the Jews. If this is the case does anyone have any written information for me . If so i will need to repent. I have researched but I cannot find it anywhere just people saying he repented. I fear God if I have judged the man incorrectly. Thank you.

    Vanessa,

    I’d be interested to know if this is true as well. To my knowledge, Martin Luther remained a Jew hater until his death.

    Luther’s last public sermon, delivered three days before he died (February 15, 1546), was a hate-filled diatribe entitled “Exhortation Against the Jews” where he advocated ghettoization. He called them “public enemies” and “blood suckers” and warned his hearers against “strange sin” which, in his mind, meant living side-by-side with Jews in society.

    “On the Jews and Their Lies” (1543) was Satan’s playbook for Kristallnacht and beyond, and evidence that he was trapped in deep bitterness during his twilight years, having succumbed to the forces of darkness after decades of Bible study. His life is an eye-opening lesson in the perils of neglecting to guard your heart. Armed with a pen dipped in venom, he wasted his final hours writing vituperative antisemitic tracts under the guise of contending for the faith. Centuries later, his words were plastered all over Germany, and his toxic ideas poisoned minds, instigated violence, and justified mass murder against the Jews he hated so much.

    Luther was willing to kill Jews himself. Questioned whether it’s okay to punch a blaspheming Jew, Luther replied, “Certainly! I would slap his face and, if I could, fling him to the ground and, in my anger, pierce him with my sword. For since human and divine law permit to kill a highway robber, it is much more so permitted to kill a blasphemer.”

    Luther believed and taught the error of replacement theology. He got his antisemitism from twisting Bible verses, wresting large portions of the Old Testament and much of the New, hopefully not to his own destruction.

    Tragically, Luther finished his life spreading hatred and promoting violence. I really hope he made a deathbed confession, but how would we know?

    “Martin Luther’s Anti-Semitism: Against His Better Judgment” by Eric W. Gritsch is worth reading.

  • Vanessa

    Hello Kathleen, I must say that I am still trying to research this info but it looks as though he may have not. So no update and thank you for replying. Thank you once again.

  • Ame

    Article said:

    “In other words, the reprobate wicked are themselves to blame for God’s sovereign choice not to soften their hearts and to incline them to believe the Gospel because they have rejected God’s sovereign choice not to soften their hearts and incline them to believe the Gospel. Is this what they call righteousness and justice?”

    I would have changed “Gospel” in each instance to instead read, “the Calvinist’s Gospel”. To me, there is only one Gospel and that is simply John 3:16, with no TULIP added! The verse says, “…whosoever believes…”, not “…whosoever CAN believe if God chooses…”!!!

    Thanks for the help in understanding this doctrine.

  • J.Rubens

    Well, according (quite according) with what John Calvin wrote in his “Institutes of the Christian Religion”, GOD HATES CHILDREN BEFORE THEY ARE BORN, HATES CHILDREN STILL IN THE WOMB, HATES JUST-BORN CHILDREN,HATES LITTLE-AGED CHILDREN, in such a way that He condemns THOSE CHILDREN to dwell forever in a place called hell. And french man Calvin “explains” that those children became BLAMABLE on their own “responsibility”, they “rejected” God, they acted “FREELY” or in “FREE WILL”. On the other hand, those few (very few) ELECT, also including some children, were called or “selected” by God’s eternal decree, even unmerited, even not having FREE WILL. Mr. Calvin “stretches” his doctrine to the point of asserting that GOD IS THE AUTHOR AND CONSUMER OF GOOD AND EVIL.
    And more: The same writer John Calvin declares that EVERY MAN IN THIS WORLD is like a HORSE, and EVERY WOMAN IN THIS WORLD is like a MULE, and both of them, MAN and WOMAN, are subject or liable to be “ridden” by God or by devil. This is the “summary” or the “synopsis” of calvinistic doctrine.

  • Sansha

    GOD is Holy and He is Love.
    GOD is ONLY good and He is ALWAYS good – there is NO darkness in Him and NO evil in Him. He does not lie and He is no respecter of persons.

    GOD said that His Grace is available to ALL people in EQUAL shares and He also said that His Grace is enough.

    This means ALL people are elected to be saved and HE gave ALL people enough Grace to make the right choice, because it is NOT HIS WILL that anyone be lost.

    WE must choose LIFE or DEATH.

    The fact that GOD is allknowing has nothing to do with your freedom to make an ETERNAL choice.

    We are because GOD loved us first.
    We can LIVE only because He proved/showed His Love by His unfathomable Sacrifice – by sending His OWN Son to take/pay the wages/payment/punishment of sin.

    No sin/evil/darkness/lie can EVER exist in GOD’s holiness/presence.

    We will live and be worthy to be in His presence ONLY by accepting the completed work His Son Jesus did on that cross in our stead.

    We have to believe He not only died in our stead but He also raised from the dead as a First Fruit so that we can have the assurance of also being raised one day by the Holy Spirit.

    Nobody can please GOD without faith.

    Why would we need faith at all if GOD (contrary to His caracter) decided who are going to heaven and who are going to hell in advance?

    Why did GOD give us ALL the means to make choices if He never intended for us to actually MAKE CHOICES?

    Fact is – GOD wants us to CHOOSE HIM & LIFE – but because He gave us the freedom to choose He also knew that we might choose wrong. Thank GOD for His omniscience/foreknowledge for He will NEVER be caught offguard!

    GOD is in controle but we have to make our OWN freewill choices!

  • Chris

    Hello staff at DTW. Here is a link to how the god of calvinism and the the god islam is relatively the same person. Please read the link that it may help farther your efforts.

    http://www.freewill-predestination.com/islam.html

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  

  

  

Terms and Conditions for Submission of Comments

Calvinism, The Greatest God-Sent Delusion of all Time

Terms and Conditions:terms and conditions

Because this world is becoming more evil by the minute and Discerning the World is coming under attack more often from people with some very nasty dispositions, we now have ‘Terms and Conditions for Submission of Comments‘ which you need to agree too before you can comment – this is to protect us and you when you comment on this website.  If you are not here to harm Discerning the World and it’s authors, please by all means comment, however if you are here to cause harm in any way, please don’t comment.

The following conditions does not mean that the authors of Discerning The World permit only opinions that are in agreement with us. This also does not mean that we fear dissenting opinions or ideas that are contrary to the beliefs that we hold (and/or that of the revealed Scriptures of the Holy Bible).

The following describes the Terms and Conditions applicable to your use of the “Comments” submission service at the Discerning the World website.

BY CLICKING THE “POST COMMENT” BUTTON FOR YOUR COMMENT, YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND ABIDE BY ALL OF THE RULES AND POLICIES SET FORTH HEREIN. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, DO NOT SUBMIT YOUR COMMENT TO DISCERNING THE WORLD WEB SITE.

  1. Discerning the World owns and operates the DiscerningtheWorld.com site (the “Site”). Your use of the features on the Site allowing for submission of a “Comment” is subject to the following terms and conditions (the “Terms”). Discerning the World may modify these Terms at any time without notice to you by posting revised Terms on the Site. Your submission of a “Comment” to the Site following the modification of these Terms shall constitute your binding acceptance of and agreement to be bound by those modified Terms.
  2. By submitting a “Comment” you are accepting these Terms through your clicking of the “POST COMMENT” button.
  3. Discerning the World has the right, but not the obligation, to take any of the following actions, in Discerning the World’s sole unfettered discretion, at any time, and for any reason or no reason, without providing any prior notice:
    1. Restrict, suspend or terminate your ability to submit “Comments,” to the Site;
    2. Change, suspend or modify all or any part of the Site or the features thereof;
    3. Refuse or remove any material posted on, submitted to or communicated through the Site by you;
    4. Deactivate or delete any screen names, profiles or other information associated with you; or
    5. Alter, modify, discontinue or remove any comment off the Site.
  4. You agree that, when using or accessing the Site or any of the features thereof, you will not:
    1. Violate any applicable law or regulation;
    2. Interfere with or damage the Site, through hacking or any other means;
    3. Transmit or introduce to the Site or to other users thereof any viruses, cancel bots, Trojan horses, flood pings, denial of service attacks, or any other harmful code or processes;
    4. Transmit or submit harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, deceptive, fraudulent, obscene, indecent, vulgar, lewd, violent, hateful or otherwise objectionable content or material;
    5. Transmit or submit any unsolicited advertising, promotional materials, or spam;
    6. Stalk or harass any user or visitor to the Site; or
    7. Use the content or information available on the Site for any improper purpose.
  5. You retain the Copyright of any “Comment” you submit to Discerning the World. By submitting a “Comment” to Discerning the World, you agree to grant Discerning the World a irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual license to use the material or commentary that you have submitted, in any medium and in any manner that Discerning the World may, in its sole unfettered discretion, choose.
  6. By submitting a “Comment” to Discerning the World, you agree to comply with the following rules concerning such submissions:
    1.  You agree not to include in your “Comment”:
      1. Any false, defamatory, libelous, abusive, threatening, racially offensive, sexually explicit, obscene, harmful, vulgar, hateful, illegal, or otherwise objectionable content;
      2. Any content that may be seen as stalking or harassing of any other Site contributors;
      3. Any content that personally attacks an individual. (An example of a personal attack is posting negative comments about an individual in a way meant to demean that person. Note that posting your opinion about someone’s ideas, doctrine or actions is not a personal attack);
      4. Any content that discloses private details concerning any person, for eg., phone numbers that have not been made public, photos that are not in the public domain, residential address that is not public, ID numbers, Social Security numbers, email addresses that are not in the public domain, etc.;
      5. Any content that you know to be false, misleading, or fraudulent;
      6. Any use of profanity;
      7. Any content including advertisements or otherwise focused on the promotion of commercial events or businesses, or any request for or solicitation of money, goods, or services for private gain;
      8. Any content that contains software viruses or any other computer code, files or programs designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment; or
      9. Any content directly or indirectly soliciting responses from minors (defined as anyone under 18 years of age).
  7. FAIR USE NOTICE:
    1. If any part of the “Comment” is not your original work, it is your responsibility to add the name of the third party, name the book with page number or a link (url) to the website where you obtained the information.
    2. Your “Comment” may contain Copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. You are however allowed to make such material available in your “Comment” in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this Site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
    3. If you wish to use copyrighted material from a website or any other medium for purposes to add to your “Comment” that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. (Fair Use means you may quote from copyrighted sources, but you may not publish the whole article, book, etc., in your “Comment”.)
  8. You are solely responsible for the “Comment” you upload, post, transmit or otherwise make available to others using this Web Site. Under no circumstances will Discerning the World be liable in any way for any “Comment” posted on or made available through this Site by you or any third party.
  9. You understand that all “Comments” on this Site are pre-screened or moderated. That means that every “Comment” needs to be approved by Discerning the World before it appears in the “Comments” section.  This is not an automatic process.  Discerning the World does this for SPAM reasons.
  10. Discerning the World has the right (but not the obligation) in their sole unfettered discretion to remove any “Comment” that is posted on or available through the Site. Without limiting the foregoing, Discerning the World has the right to remove any “Comment” that violates these Terms or is otherwise deemed objectionable by Discerning the World in its sole discretion.
  11. You understand that Discerning the World in their sole unfettered discretion is not obligated and can not be forced in any manner, be it legal or otherwise to remove any “Comment” that is posted on or made available through the Site by you.
  12. When submitting a “Comment,” you will be asked to provide your name and your email address. While Discerning the World does not object to your use of a pseudonym instead of your actual name, Discerning the World reserves the right, but not the obligation, to reject, change, disallow, or discontinue at any time any submission name that, in Discerning the World’s sole unfettered discretion, is objectionable or inappropriate for any reason. Discerning the World requires the submission of your email address, but Discerning the World warrants that it will not publish your email address to an outside third party without your consent.
  13. Discerning the World does not sell or rent your personal information to third parties for their marketing purposes. From time to time, Discerning the World may contact you personally via email. Notwithstanding the foregoing, you acknowledge and understand that the “Comments” feature of the Site is designed to permit users to post information and commentary for public review and comment and thus you hereby waive any expectation of privacy you may have concerning any likeness or information provided to the Site by you.
  14. You are solely responsible for your interactions with other users of or visitors to the Site.
    1. Discerning the World shall have the right, but not the obligation, to monitor interactions utilizing the “Comments” facility of the Site, between you and other users of or visitors to the Site. You acknowledge and agree that Discerning the World, or any third party shall not be, and you shall not seek to hold them, responsible for any harm or damage whatsoever arising in connection with your interaction with other users of or visitors to the Site.
    2. Discerning the World does not verify any information posted to or communicated via the “Comments” sections of the Site by users and does not guarantee the proper use of such information by any party who may have access to the information. You acknowledge and agree that Discerning the World does not assume, and shall not have, any responsibility for the content of messages or other communications sent or received by users of the Site.
  15. The Site contains content created by or on behalf of Discerning the World as well as content provided by third parties.
    1. Discerning the World does not control, and makes no representations or warranties about, any third party content, including such content that may be accessible directly on the Site or through links from the Site to third party sites.
    2. You acknowledge that, by viewing the Site or communications transmitted through the Site, you may be exposed to third party content that is false, offensive or otherwise objectionable to you or others, and you agree that under no circumstances shall Discerning the World be liable in any way, under any theory, for any third party content.
    3. You acknowledge and agree that the Site, and the contents thereof, is proprietary to Discerning the World and is protected by copyright. You agree that you will not access or use the Site or any of the content thereof for any reason or purpose other than your personal, non-commercial use.
    4. You agree that you will not systematically retrieve data or other content from the Site by any means, and you will not compile a database or directory of information extracted from the Site.
    5. You agree that you will not reproduce, distribute or make derivative works of the Site or any of the contents thereof without the express consent of Discerning the World.
    6. You hereby agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Discerning the World, its affiliates and licensees, and all of their officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives from and against any and all liabilities, losses, claims, damages, and expenses (including attorneys’ fees) in connection with any claim arising out of your use of the Site or violation of any of these Terms.

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY/LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.

  • YOU EXPRESSLY AGREE THAT USE OF THE SITE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK. NEITHER DISCERNING THE WORLD, ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OR LICENSORS WARRANT THAT THE SITE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, TIMELY, SECURE OR ERROR FREE.
  • THE SITE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF TITLE OR IMLPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
  • THIS DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY APPLIES TO ANY DAMAGES OR INJURY CAUSED BY ANY FAILURE OF PERFORMANCE, ERROR, OMISSION, INTERRUPTION, DELETION, DEFECT, DELAY, COMMUNICATION LINE FAILURE, THEFT OR DESTRUCTION OR UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO, ALTERATION OF OR USE, WHETHER FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, TORTIOUS BEHAVIOR, NEGLIGENCE OR UNDER ANY OTHER CAUSE OF ACTION. YOU SPECIFICALLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT DISCERNING THE WORLD SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR THE DEFAMATORY, OFFENSIVE OR ILLEGAL CONDUCT OF USERS OF THE SITE OR THIRD PARTIES, AND THAT THE RISK OF INJURY FROM THE FOREGOING RESTS ENTIRELY WITH THE YOU THE COMMENTER.
  • IN NO EVENT WILL DISCERNING THE WORLD, ITS AFFILIATES OR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, AGENTS OR LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, ARISING FROM, RELATING TO OR CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SITE OR ANY OTHER MATTER ARISING FROM, RELATING TO OR CONNECTED WITH THE SITE OR THESE TERMS.

16. These Terms constitute the entire agreement between Discerning the World and you with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any previous oral or written agreement between us with respect to such subject matter.

Thank you!