John Calvin and Calvinism.

[GodsGrace]

Hi @GodsGrace Geneva is indeed in Switzerland now, but it didn't become part of Switzerland until the 19th century.

The two terms: God's sovereignty and human responsibility, go well together.

Agreed on Geneva...
History of Geneva

First noted as a Roman settlement in 58 B.C., Geneva quickly grew into an important trading town in the heart Europe during the Middle Ages. Due to its strategic locale, the city was a major target of conquest and changed hands several times before eventually establishing itself as an independent republic in 1535. Final independence was gained in 1602 when the people of Geneva repelled an attempted invasion by the Duke of Savoy. Celebration of the defense of the city takes place till today - l'Escalade.

Following the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in the mid-1600’s, Geneva became a major refuge for persecuted Protestants from throughout the continent. Attracted by the teachings of John Calvin, John Knox and Theodore de Beze, Geneva’s refugee population exploded, garnering Geneva the title "Protestant Rome". This period also brought the first waves of watchmakers, jewelers, and other artisans who would soon make Geneva famous the world over its craftsmanship.

Throughout the following centuries, Geneva attracted many rich aristocrats who established grand estates around the city. Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and other philosophers and artists soon followed, further adding to the refinement of the city

On September 12, 1814 Geneva joined the Confederation of Switzerland and quickly grew as a banking hub and a leader of the industrial revolution in Europe.

Toward the end of the century, in 1864, Henry Dunant founded the Red Cross laying the groundwork for the modern conception of the city as an international hub and champion of human rights. The first convening of the League of Nations took place in 1920, followed by the opening of the European Headquarters of the United Nations in 1946.

Geneva today is a product of the best of its history, drawing on its many cultural influences and providing a refuge of peace that serves as a model for the rest of the world.

source: Geneva history | Geneva.info.


However,
I'm not sure what you mean by your second sentence.
I believe, as all Christians do, that God is soveriegn.
I also believe that we are responsible for our actions.

If you're reformed, let me know now since some write very vague ideas.
The reformed believe God predestinates EVERYTHING that happens....
which takes away our responsibility for sinning.
However, they insist that we are still responsible.
Does not make logical sense.
But there are so many "mysteries" in the reformed faith. (ideas that are not explainable).

 

[GodsGrace]

Brace yourself, we are about to be told we simply do not understand Calvinism.

I've heard this many times...
but never told why or where the "misunderstanding" is.
I'm waiting to hear from @Lifelong_sinner

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't know, Pinseeker. I have a hard time wrapping my brain around that if it is true. The garbage I am reading in this thread is understandable if they are simply ignorant, but is not acceptable if they have read his work with any kind of thoroughness.

Hi FH
I'm trying to figure out if I'm spouting the garbage...I also am reading garbage, but it's from the other side! Sorry 'bout that.
It's really difficult to accept that God has the character that is espoused by Calvinism.
I've read some of his work.
What do you think those on my side do not understand?
I keep asking this but never receive a reply.
I'm beginning to think that maybe calvinists don't understand what they believe.
Can it be?

They fail to see that Calvin believed in pious living. For sakes, he was the one who coined the phrase, "grace is not a license to sin!" Yet they make him out to be someone who believes we can sin all we want.

Whoever believes this is wrong.
What you've stated is correct.

Calvin believed in predestination (with good reason as it is in the Bible) but fail to realize that it was God to know (not us) who is predestinated. So we as a result of not knowing must strive. Yet, they make it out as if there is no sense in striving. They really pervert what Calvin said, and I am not confident they treat the Bible differently.

I believe God foreknew everything...
but He did not predestinate everything.
As I'm sure you know, knowing something is not the same as causing something.
I don't see predestination in scripture.
I see that we have free will to choose to be saved, if we so desire.
God's invitation is open to all.
I also believe that the N.T. is full of verses that show we are to persevere and strive, as you put it.
(but not for the same reason you believe this).
I also believe we can know if we are saved.
How could we have an abundant life, as Jesus said, if we cannot be secure in our knowledge of salvation?

This is not logical to me, so no... I don't believe they have read his work.

No, its not. Frankly, I've stated that the truth that God predestinates doesn't help us.

I do agree, now look at this thread... Do you see discord among the brethren?

What is discord?
We Christians disagree about other matters too.
I find this to be unfortunate.

 

[GodsGrace]

It's none of that. Calvinism is not abstruse, arcane, mysterious, complex, complicated, erudite, inscrutable or unfathomable for the common man.

Grace and peace to you. It's really assigning things other than true Calvinism to Calvin and his exposition of Scripture. For various reasons, people do, however, distort it into something it's not, and others just buy in, sometimes blindly. And that's very Biblical; as Paul says in 2 Timothy 4:3, many do not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions.

Grace and peace to you.

Would YOU be willing to tell us ignorant folk what it is we do not understand about calvinism?
WHAT do we attribute to Calvin that he did not teach?
Thanks.

 

[Grailhunter]

Not in any way, shape, or form.


Okay, and I'm not debating that at all. Like I said, though, Calvinism/Schmalvinism; God's truth is God's truth... Thus, my focus on Scripture itself.


Yes, you are, because you're making statements antithetical to what he said. It's either ignorance or just outright rejection on your part, and like I said, it seems to be a good dose of both. I don't mean that to be offensive to you, but, well, it is what it is.


Absolutely. I agreed with this before, and I'll agree with it until I'm blue in the face. :)


I'm not sure what denomination John Calvin was a member of, if any at all. At that time, it was really Catholicism or Protestant, and as you know, there are many denominations since then that fall under the Protestant heading. That was the purpose of the Reformation, started, really, by Martin Luther ~ to reclaim Biblical Christianity from the errors of Catholicism.


Ahhh, well, again, some of your questions needed clarification, because they themselves arose in the form they did from an apparent misunderstanding or ignorance of what Calvin wrote.


Right. See above. Yes, I am a Calvinist, and a "five-point Calvinist" at that. I was quite clear about Calvinism and by extension myself. See above. Of course, I'm kind of anticipating that you'll try to put words in my mouth, but I really hope not. :)

Grace and peace to you.

Let me show you what honesty looks like.
If you ask me if I believe in free-will?.....the answer will be yes.
If you ask me if I believe in total predestination or limited predestination or no predestination at all?.....the answer, very little predestination.
If you ask me if I believe in irresistible Grace or Hyper-grace?.....the answer is no.
If you ask me if I believe that God determined the salvation or damnation of individuals before creation?...the answer is no.
If you ask me if I believe in the total depravity of Mankind?...the answer is no.
If you ask me if I believe in unconditional election?....the answer is no.
If you ask me what the elect are? I say all that choose Christ.
If you ask me if I believe in limited atonement? the answer is no.
If you ask me if I believe in the Perseverance of the saints.....which means OSAS? the answer is no.

See what honesty looks like. Try some.

 

[GodsGrace]

Reprobates dont usually get converted.

Under true -Christianity they can.
Only according to Calvin they cannot.

John 3:16 I know you misunderstand it...but maybe if we post it enough times?

 

[PinSeeker]

Let me show you what honesty looks like.

Well I know what you want it to look like, and that's the problem. But okay, I will respond to each one in order after your response. Really, I did so, but Ill do it like you want it (which is sort of silly):

If you ask me if I believe in free-will?.....the answer will be yes.

Me, too. Yes. But the issue really is ~ and some don't even realize it ~ autonomy. We are not autonomous beings, specifically with regard to God's great salvation. Only God is. Salvation if of Him, whole and entire. It depends on God, who has mercy (or not).

If you ask me if I believe in total predestination or limited predestination or no predestination at all?.....the answer, very little predestination.

Okay, well in addition to your answer being antithetical to Scripture itself (as I demonstrated), my answer is total predestination, as I explained. Very simply, if one chooses 'A' and not it's opposite ('B'), then one is actively choosing 'not B.' If one makes a choice, he or she is necessarily actively choosing against it's opposite.

If you ask me if I believe in irritable Grace or Hyper-grace?.....the answer is no.

Irritable grace? What's that? :) I presume you mean irresistible grace, and that I believe in absolutely (but I think you have a convoluted idea of what the Calvinistic concept of irresistible grace really is; thus my clarification). And again, I have no idea what you mean by "hyper-grace;" I've don't think I've ever heard that term, um, created or used.

If you ask me if I believe that God determined the salvation or damnation of individuals before creation?...the answer is no.

Right, well, my answer is yes, and I said that and backed it up with Scripture, particularly with what Paul writes in Romans 9:19-24 (cited above). That you answer no to this question is... okay with me (facetiously speaking), but why do you answer no to this? Just because you want to? :)

If you ask me if I believe in the total depravity of Mankind?...the answer is no.

Well, again, I'm not sure you understand the Calvinistic concept of total depravity. But Scripture backs it up, so yes, but again we might saying no (on your part) and yes (on my part) regarding fundamentally different things.

If you ask me if I believe in unconditional election?....the answer is no.

Okay, yes. And as I demonstrated, Scripture backs me up rather than you.

If you ask me what the elect are? I say all that choose Christ.

Sure. Yes. But the way you answer that question seems to be that you think they are elect because they choose Christ, that God's election of individuals depends on their choosing Christ, and that's the direct opposite of what Scripture says, particularly Romans 9:14-18.

If you ask me if I believe in limited atonement? the answer is no.

Sure, and I say yes. for the very reason that God did not give everybody to Christ, but only the ones He elected (before the foundation of the world).

If you ask me if I believe in the Perseverance of the saints.....which means OSAS? the answer is no.

Sure. Yes, the perseverance of the saints, those who have been born again of the Spirit ~ because God's purposes cannot be thwarted ~ is an absolute inevitability. The calling of God is irrevocable. Those whom God begins a good work in God, by His will and in His power, will bring to completion at the day of Christ.

See what honesty looks like.

Sure, well I know full well what honesty "looks like," and that's all I've exhibited from post 1.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, that's a good idea. Let's.


Here is at least part of the misunderstanding. Number 1, number 2, and number 3 are certainly true. But number 4 and number 5 are not commandments ~ a commandment being an order, a mandate, an edict, a law ~ of God. They are both part of a general call made by God to all men; repentance and belief are together the vehicle that God has provided for men to be saved. And He invites all to it; this is the general call of the Gospel. More on this in a moment.

So are there no commandments for us Christians today? No, of course that's not the case. So what is God's law for Christians today? Well, the law of Christ, of course. Paul tells the Galatian Christians (and us, by extension; Galatians 6:2) to "(c)arry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ” (emphasis added). What exactly is the law of Christ, and how is it fulfilled by carrying each other’s burdens? He also mentions the law of Christ in 1 Corinthians 9:21 ~ "To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law."

Now, nowhere does the Bible specifically define what, precisely, the law of Christ is. But the law of Christ is commonly understood to be what Christ Jesus Himself stated were the greatest commandments:

“‘Which commandment is the most important of all?’ Jesus answered, ‘The most important is, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.” The second is this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” There is no other commandment greater than these’” (Mark 12:28-31).​

Matthew records this same event and quotes Jesus thusly:

"On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 22:40).​

The law of Christ, then, is to love God with all of our being and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.


Again, He doesn't command men to repent and believe. This is the vehicle that God has provided for men to be saved, and God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) But it's not a command, but rather an invitation, and outward call, in the same sense as Jesus's Great Banquet parable in Luke 14, one of His Kingdom parables, which He begins by saying, "A man..." ~ this man represents God in this parable ~ "...once gave a great banquet and invited many" (Luke 14:16, emphasis added). So, there is no "absurdity." What I see is misunderstanding. The only question is whether it is inadvertent or intentional, and it seems to be a bit of both, really.

Grace and peace to all.

Well Pinseeker, to read the above you sound like an orthodox Christian.
I'd like to address some points you brought up in post no. 231 (?)
Here are the five questions Enoch asked you...
1. Was Adam the progenitor of the human race? Absolutely
2. Are ALL humans subject to sin and death because of Adam? Absolutely
3. Do ALL humans therefore need to be saved? Absolutely
4. Does God now command ALL men everywhere to repent? Absolutely
5. Does God now command ALL men everywhere to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? Absolutely

You stated that 1-3 are ok with you, but you don't agree that nos. 4 and 5 are commandments.
I also would not have stated this as a commandment...both the repenting and the believing on Jesus Christ.

We can, however, think of it as a command because it's what God REQUIRES for salvation of the individual. In that sense it is a commandment.

In Mark 1:15 Jesus first words are that the time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God is at hand, REPENT and BELIEVE IN THE GOSPEL.

It seems to me that when Jesus spoke He wasn't making requests, but what He taught were requirements, or also known as commandments.

In fact, if we do NOT adhere to these 2 "commandments" we cannot be saved; we are in fact disobeying God, and thus are lost.

Doesn't this also fit with the first commandments?
I am the Lord, your God (must we not obey God?)
Keep Holy the Sabbath (this is to honor God)

Just thinking out loud....
Comment?

You state that you believe in a general call.
Is this from the WCF?

How do you understand the writing of Calvin in
The Institutes of the Christian Religion
Book 3
Chapter 24
Paragraph 8

Paragraph 6 is also interesting and does state that God does the choosing of the saved.

 

[PinSeeker]

Under true -Christianity they can.
Only according to Calvin they cannot.

John 3:16 I know you misunderstand it...but maybe if we post it enough times?

Ah, the 'whoever,' or 'whosoever.' There is some misunderstanding going on here, but... :)

Do you know what Old Testament passage John is specifically referring to there, GG? Joel 2:32, specifically, but that whole passage includes verses 29-31. It says:

“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit. And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls." (emphasis mine).​

Look closely and you should be able to easily discern:

* Firstly that "those whom the LORD calls" is dependent only on the LORD
* Secondly that "those whom the LORD calls" is a specific subset of the "all flesh" at the beginning of the passage
* And thirdly that that subset of "all flesh," "those whom the LORD calls," is determined by the LORD Himself.​

Paul refers to this same passage in Romans 10:13.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

We can, however, think of it as a command because it's what God REQUIRES

It's really not worth quibbling over, but a requirement regarding salvation is not a command. But I'll allow it. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[GodsGrace]

It's really not worth quibbling over, but a requirement regarding salvation is not a command. But I'll allow it. :)

Grace and peace to you.

Please reread no. 248...It got sent too soon by mistake...

 

[Grailhunter]

Irritable grace?

That is spell check. Irresistible grace

 

[PinSeeker]

In Mark 1:15 Jesus first words are that the time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God is at hand, REPENT and BELIEVE IN THE GOSPEL. It seems to me that when Jesus spoke He wasn't making requests, but what He taught were requirements, or also known as commandments.

It's not a commandment. And I speak in the singular, because the two are part of the same thing. Jesus was making an exhortation. This is the general call of the Gospel.

In fact, if we do NOT adhere to these 2 "commandments" we cannot be saved; we are in fact disobeying God, and thus are lost.

Well, I would say that if we do not respond positively to these two exhortations ~ which together constitute on call, or invitation, as I said to someone else above ~ then God's salvation cannot be obtained. But again, our responding positively depends or will, which depends on the state of our heart, which depends on God's mercy.

Doesn't this also fit with the first commandments?
I am the Lord, your God (must we not obey God?)
Keep Holy the Sabbath (this is to honor God)

I wouldn't say so, no.

You state that you believe in a general call. Is this from the WCF?

The WCF mentions it, yes, but it's really from Scripture itself. Scripture doesn't use those exact words, but that's not necessary; it is what it is.

How do you understand the writing of Calvin in The Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 Chapter 24 Paragraph 8

Hopefully I'm referring to the same thing you're referring to, but there's the General call of God in Scripture to the Gospel, but there's the special calling, issued by God through His Holy Spirit, only to His elect, each at his/her appointed time.

Paragraph 6 is also interesting and does state that God does the choosing of the saved.

Right, well, see above, regarding Joel 2:28-32, John 3:16, and Romans 10:13. Romans 9:16 says nothing to refute the fact that we do make a choice, and a free-will one at that (is there another kind of choice?), but it does say specifically that God's election does depend not on man who wills or exerts/runs, but on God, Who has mercy. The way I would say it is either:

a.) our choice is in the context of God's choice
b) God makes choices, and those choices then enable his elect to choose rightly, and they do​

Both are acceptable. :)

Grace and peace to you!

 

[PinSeeker]

PinSeeker said: Irritable grace?

That is spell check. Irresistible grace

Right. I thought so. :) And I responded accordingly.

Grace and peace!

 

[Grailhunter]

Well I know what you want it to look like, and that's the problem. But okay, I will respond to each one in order after your response. Really, I did so, but Ill do it like you want it (which is sort of silly):


Me, too. Yes. But the issue really is ~ and some don't even realize it ~ autonomy. We are not autonomous beings, specifically with regard to God's great salvation. Only God is. Salvation if of Him, whole and entire. It depends on God, who has mercy (or not).


Okay, well in addition to your answer being antithetical to Scripture itself (as I demonstrated), my answer is total predestination, as I explained. Very simply, if one chooses 'A' and not it's opposite ('B'), then one is actively choosing 'not B.' If one makes a choice, he or she is necessarily actively choosing against it's opposite.


Irritable grace? What's that? :) I presume you mean irresistible grace, and that I believe in absolutely (but I think you have a convoluted idea of what the Calvinistic concept of irresistible grace really is; thus my clarification). And again, I have no idea what you mean by "hyper-grace;" I've don't think I've ever heard that term, um, created or used.


Right, well, my answer is yes, and I said that and backed it up with Scripture, particularly with what Paul writes in Romans 9:19-24 (cited above). That you answer no to this question is... okay with me (facetiously speaking), but why do you answer no to this? Just because you want to? :)


Well, again, I'm not sure you understand the Calvinistic concept of total depravity. But Scripture backs it up, so yes, but again we might saying no (on your part) and yes (on my part) regarding fundamentally different things.


Okay, yes. And as I demonstrated, Scripture backs me up rather than you.


Sure. Yes. But the way you answer that question seems to be that you think they are elect because they choose Christ, that God's election of individuals depends on their choosing Christ, and that's the direct opposite of what Scripture says, particularly Romans 9:14-18.


Sure, and I say yes. for the very reason that God did not give everybody to Christ, but only the ones He elected (before the foundation of the world).


Sure. Yes, the perseverance of the saints, those who have been born again of the Spirit ~ because God's purposes cannot be thwarted ~ is an absolute inevitability. The calling of God is irrevocable. Those whom God begins a good work in God, by His will and in His power, will bring to completion at the day of Christ.


Sure, well I know full well what honesty "looks like," and that's all I've exhibited from post 1.

Grace and peace to you.

Ok then, we are on the same page of Calvinist beliefs.
This is what most people that have a moderate understanding of Calvinism....know.
And I totally disagree with Calvinist beliefs.

The reason I am not interested in your scriptures is because I know several cults that can quote scriptures to support their beliefs.
Study the Jehovah's Witness religion and the scriptures they sight to support their religion and you will see how it is done from another angle.

Another study, which is a little more difficult is the People's Temple cult....Jim Jones....very big on biblical study.
There are lots of Christian religions out there....shoot, Voodoo has a strong connection to Christianity. So you have the Calvinists that blaspheme God and the Jehovah's Witnesses that deny the Deity of Christ and the New Age folks that with Bible in hand mix Christianity with witchcraft.

 

[Enoch111]

Can there be a crucifixion without sin?

You are merely trying to deflect from the main issue, since you cannot support your position. God certainly predetermined the sacrifice of Christ, but He DOES NOT elect (or predetermine) some for salvation and others for damnation. That would cancel the purpose of the crucifixion, and also make God a liar. It is the liar Satan who has planted into the minds of men the false idea that God predetermines who will be saved, and who will be damned. But God offers salvation to all freely.

 

[GodsGrace]

Ah, the 'whoever,' or 'whosoever.' There is some misunderstanding going on here, but... :)

Do you know what Old Testament passage John is specifically referring to there, GG? Joel 2:32, specifically, but that whole passage includes verses 29-31. It says:

“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit. And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls." (emphasis mine).​

Look closely and you should be able to easily discern:

* Firstly that "those whom the LORD calls" is dependent only on the LORD
* Secondly that "those whom the LORD calls" is a specific subset of the "all flesh" at the beginning of the passage
* And thirdly that that subset of "all flesh," "those whom the LORD calls," is determined by the LORD Himself.​

Paul refers to this same passage in Romans 10:13.

Grace and peace to you.

PS
It doesn't matter what OT passage is being referred to in John 3:16 because the bible does not have conflict in its message.

Isaiah is referred to, Jeremiah is referred to, Kings...
anywhere where it is stated that the name of the Lord is called upon.

Joel 2:32.....EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.
Acts 17:31...BEIEVE IN THE NAME OF THE LORD AND YOU WILL BE SAVED.
Acts 2:21....EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED
Romans 10:13..EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED....

Also, if you notice, the OT also teaches us that the Lord may be found: (and the NT)

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

Proverbs 8:17
I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.

Jeremiah 12:13
You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

Deuteronomy 4:29
But from there you will seek the Lord your God and you will find him, if you search after him with all your heart and with all your soul.

Isaiah 55:6-7
“Seek the Lord while he may be found; call upon him while he is near; let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

and many more...

We cannot only use scripture that SEEMS to agree with what we believe...
we must use all of scripture because God does not contradict Himself.

John 3:16 may seem descriptive to you...
But you cannot deny that all of the above are prescriptive.

God calls everyone and is not a respecter of persons:
1 Timothy 2:4 God desires that all men be saved...not just some of His choosing.

Romans 2:11 There is no partiality with God...Jew and Gentile have the same opportunity of salvation.

 

[TEXBOW]

PS
It doesn't matter what OT passage is being referred to in John 3:16 because the bible does not have conflict in its message.

Isaiah is referred to, Jeremiah is referred to, Kings...
anywhere where it is stated that the name of the Lord is called upon.

Joel 2:32.....EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.
Acts 17:31...BEIEVE IN THE NAME OF THE LORD AND YOU WILL BE SAVED.
Acts 2:21....EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED
Romans 10:13..EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED....

Also, if you notice, the OT also teaches us that the Lord may be found: (and the NT)

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

Proverbs 8:17
I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.

Jeremiah 12:13
You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

Deuteronomy 4:29
But from there you will seek the Lord your God and you will find him, if you search after him with all your heart and with all your soul.

Isaiah 55:6-7
“Seek the Lord while he may be found; call upon him while he is near; let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

and many more...

We cannot only use scripture that SEEMS to agree with what we believe...
we must use all of scripture because God does not contradict Himself.

John 3:16 may seem descriptive to you...
But you cannot deny that all of the above are prescriptive.

God calls everyone and is not a respecter of persons:
1 Timothy 2:4 God desires that all men be saved...not just some of His choosing.

Romans 2:11 There is no partiality with God...Jew and Gentile have the same opportunity of salvation.

They just do not understand.

 

[GodsGrace]

That is spell check. Irresistible grace

LOL
I think irresistible grace IS irritable grace!

 

[GodsGrace]

They just do not understand.

I've read your posts and those of @Grailhunter and I find them to be superior!
:)