CALVIN was Correct on Acts 13:48 and 2 Pet. 3:9

[Arthur81]

"Since you reject it and judge yourselves to be unworthy of eternal life, we are now turning to the Gentiles, for so the Lord has commanded us, saying, ‘I have set you to be a light for the Gentiles, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth. When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and praised the word of the Lord; and as many as had been destined for eternal life became believers." (Acts 13:46b-48 NRSVue)

Acts 13:48 -
"ordained to eternal life" KJV, RV, ASV, RSV, Douay-Rheims
"destined for eternal life" NRSV, NRSVue, ISV, NABre, Phillips, Amplified Bible
"appointed for eternal life" NIV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, YLT
"chosen for eternal life" NLT, GNB, CEV


1. I find no English translation that renders this "disposed" for eternal life. Calvin was surely correct: "For it is a ridiculous cavil to refer this unto the affection of those which believed, as if those received the gospel whose minds were well-disposed. For this ordaining must be understood of the eternal counsel of God alone." Calvin's commentary on Acts
2. Being ordained, destined, appointed or chosen by God, was prior to the persons believing
3. A man’s reprobation is ascribed by Scripture to man himself; but a man's salvation, ascribed to GOD alone, so the comparison of v46 with v48 is as in - The 1644 First London Confession of Faith (Baptist):

"And touching His creature man (Eph. 1:3-7; 2 Tim. 1:9; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:29-30), God had in Christ before the foundation of the world, according to the good pleasure of His will, foreordained some men to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace (Jude 4,6; Rom. 9:11- 13; Prov.16:4), leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice."

http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1st-london-1644-ed.pdf

A man being sent into eternal punishment is due to his sins, of which unbelief is also a sin; but a man being sent into eternal life is solely due to the mercy and grace of God in Christ. When men sinned in Adam and also in himself, God was under NO obligation to save anyone, period. Therefore, God is not unfair to save any number of mankind that he wills, none of men, or the "many" of Matt. 8:11.

"And the LORD said to Job: 2 'Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty? Anyone who argues with God must respond.' 3 Then Job answered the LORD: 4 'See, I am of small account; what shall I answer you? I lay my hand on my mouth. 5 I have spoken once, and I will not answer, twice but will proceed no further.' 6 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind: 7 'Gird up your loins like a man; I will question you, and you declare to me. 8 Will you even put me in the wrong? Will you condemn me that you may be justified?'"(Job 40:1-8 NRSVue)

"Can mortals be righteous before(or, more righteous than) God? Can human be pure before(or, more pure than) their Maker?" (Job 4:17 NRSVue)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance." (2Pet 3:9 NRSVue)

NRSVue, CEV, GNB wanting; RV, ASV, RSV wishing; KJV, REB, DRC, ABP willing

One view of God's will, want, desire or wish is one of decree, purpose, intention:
"In Christ we have also obtained an inheritance, having been destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will" (Eph 1:11 NRSVue)

"Whatever the LORD pleases he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps." (Ps 135:6 NRSVue)

"But he stands alone, and who can dissuade him? What he desires, that he does." (Job 23:13 NRSVue)

*If this will of decree is what is meant, the "all" has to be applied to the "saints", the "elect", "those who were destined"; or, you have a universal salvation, every person will repent, but that is wrong according to many of the scriptures.

A second view of God's will, desire or wish in 2 Pet 3:9, it is the will of precept, what is commanded for man to do.
"The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the revealed things belong to us and to our children forever, to observe all the words of this law." (Deut 29:29 NRSVue)

"Do you imagine, whoever you are, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" (Rom 2:3-4 NRSV)

"He established a decree in Jacob and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our ancestors to teach to their children" (Ps 78:5 NRSVue)

"but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—" (Rom 16:26 NRSV)

Interestingly, the Jay Green's Literal reads "not having purposed" and the YLT "not counseling".

Calvin was right on this also: "But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel." Commentary on 2 Peter

 

[BlessedPeace]

Hello, worms? No worries. Your can has now been opened.

So many say they read the Bible. I believe them.


Not many know what the Bible says.
Great thread!

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Even AT Robertson, a Calvinist, rejects the idea that the Calvinist idea of election is found in Acts 13:48:

"As many as were ordained to eternal life (οσο ησαν τεταγμενο εις ζωην αιωνιον). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of τασσω, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an absolutum decretum of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away."


v46
"Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

God no more unconditionally predetermined those Gentiles to believe and be saved than He unconditionally predetermined those Jews to reject the gospel and be lost. Those Jews of their own free will rejected God's word (see also 1 Thess 2:14-16) and the Gentiles of their own free will determined themselves to hear God's word and believe, v42.

(1) the mis-interpretation of Acts 13:47 by Calvinists have one of God's elect/chosen BEFORE that person even believes. There is no example anywhere in the NT of one being of God's elect/saved BEFORE he believes.

(2) the context of Acts 13 Paul shows contrasting reactions of people when they are presented the gospel. In the first part of the chapter Paul deals with two individuals, Sergius Paulus and a sorcerer names Barjesus. Sergius Paulus of his own free will "desired to hear the word of God" while Barjesus of his own free will " withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith". This shows the contrast of two men in how they prepared their hearts in reception of the gospel, which relates to Christ's words in how men prepare their hearts (soil) to reception of the seed (word of God).

(3) Later in chapter 13 Paul shows the contrast between two groups, Jews and Gentiles. The Jews of their own free will, when they "saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming"and put the word of God away from themselves. While the Gentiles prepared their hearts to receive the seed "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath." v42.

So the contrast is between those of their own free will who determined themselves to reject the word of God against those of their own free will that determined themselves to be receptive to God's word.



(4) the meaning of the Greek word tasso is to set in order, to determine and can be either passive or active voice. The CONTEXT shows it would be in the middle voice, again, setting in contrast those that determined themselves to reject the word of God and would not believe versus those that determined themselves to be receptive to the word of God and believed. Therefore from Acts 13:47 the Gentiles determined themselves to be receptive to the word of God and as a result, believed. And it is those that believe that make up the chosen/elect of God that God saves. So the context is NOT about God having already 'chosen' these Gentiles and as a result they believed, but how the Gentiles belief resulted from them having prepared, tasso - determined their own hearts to receive the word of God.

(5) the context leading up to Acts 13:47 does not fit Calvinism:

--verse 42 " the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath" obviously the Gentiles were not totally depraved but were willing to hear and be receptive of the word of God. We cannot find in the context where they were 'unregenerate' and therefore had to first be 'regenerated' by the Holy Spirit before they would be able or willing to hear and understand the word of God.

--verse 43 "Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God." Persuasion had no place in a theology of determination. If God predetermined them to be in His grace and saved then for a certainty they will be saved and would be impossible for them to fall from God's grace. No sense or reason to "persuade them" when God is the one in 100% control of what happens.

--verse 47 "For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth." The phrase "ends of the earth" is figurative for any man any where of the earth, not limited to certain individuals. Salvation therefore is not limited but is for any and lost sinners anywhere even "unto the ends of the earth". (Isa 49:6)


Eze 18
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.
Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.


Eze 33:
Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live?
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?

God has not unconditionally predetermined some men to be lost for He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turn from his evil ways and live.

 

[BlessedPeace]

Perhaps Mr.Robertson should consider the scriptural references to The Elect of God.

The voice of the narrator is a bit much. However,this is very informative on the subject.

John 6:37
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

​

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Perhaps Mr.Robertson should consider the scriptural references to The Elect of God.

The voice of the narrator is a bit much. However,this is very informative on the subject.

John 6:37
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

​

Hi

Any person can take a single verse out of context and read any idea he/she wants to read into it and make it say whatever they wish. This is how there is over 40k religious groups that have created an ocean of contradictions contrary and antagonistic the the NT.

You cite Jn 6:37;

1) It is ASSUMED by some this 'giving' took place before the 'foundation of the world' yet the verb 'gives' is present tense denoting an action that is currently taking place and continuing to take place. There were those who were being given to Christ at the present time John was writing His epistles and this giving continues on till today.

The giving is a present activity, not a foregone conclusion.

In what sense did God “give” people to his Son? The terms “gift” and “given” are frequently employed idiomatically in the Scriptures to denote divine favor as expressed in Heaven’s redemptive work on man’s behalf — without there being any inclination of an “unconditional election.”

For example, David prophesied that Jehovah would “give” the “nations” (Gentiles) to Christ as an inheritance (Psa. 2:8; cf. Acts 4:25-26). Surely no one will contend that all Gentiles were unconditionally predestined to salvation, irrespective of their response to divine truth. Even the most cursory examination of the book of Acts, from chapter 10 onward, reveals that the Gentiles were admitted into redemptive favor by yielding to the requirements of the gospel. Salvation was not as a consequence of an eternal decree independent of human obedience (cf. Acts 10:34-35,43; 11:14; 15:8-9; 1 Pet. 1:22-23).

What relationship is there between the “giving” and the “coming” in John 6:37? There is a significant connection. The “giving” represents what God has provided in the great plan of human salvation; the “coming” represents the acceptation of that plan as manifested in the sinner’s obedience.
The subsequent context affords a wonderful illustration of this — with slightly different imagery, but with corresponding thought. Note the language of verses 44-45.

“No man can come to me, except the Father that sent me draw him: and I will raise him up in the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Every one who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes unto me.”

In this passage, God’s “drawing” is parallel to his “giving” of verse 37. And yet, clearly in vv. 44-45 the drawing is accomplished by hearing his word, learning, and coming to the Lord. Jehovah provides the redemptive information, but humanity must access it. By a comparison of these passages, therefore, one may logically conclude that this is how men are “given” to Christ as well. As Bloomfield once observed, “The term [gives] therefore (here and at ver. 39 and 65) must signify something compatible with the free agency of man” (I, p. 363).

When former Baptist minister Robert Shank issued his book, Life in the Son, it produced shock waves among Calvinists. Professor William Adams of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary characterized the book as “one of the most arresting and disturbing books” he had ever read (p. xiii).In this instructive volume, Shank has a special Appendix, “Whom Does the Father Give to Jesus?” in which he discusses this very passage.Therein the author fires this parting blast:

“There is nothing about God’s gift of believers to be the heritage of the Son who died for them which somehow transforms the Gospel’s ‘whosoever will’ into a ‘whosoever must’ and a ‘most of you shan’t.‘ There is nothing about it which binds men in the strait jacket of an antecedent decree of positive unconditional election and reprobation, while insisting that they are ’free’” (p. 339).

Our final question is this: “What is the meaning of the affirmation, ‘I will in no wise cast out’?”

Some allege it suggests the dogma of the impossibility of apostasy, i.e., that no one “given” to Christ in the eternal scheme of things could ever be lost.The child of God, therefore, can never fall from grace — or so it is claimed.
The passage does not even remotely suggest this pernicious doctrine. Even Albert Barnes, who subscribed to the Calvinistic doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy (see his comment at Matthew 7:23), conceded the following, with reference to John 6:37b. “This expression does not refer to the doctrine of perseverance of the saints, but to the fact that Jesus will not reject or refuse any sinner who comes to him” (pp. 246-247).

This admission, combined with the scriptural declarations that God wants all men to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9), and that “whosoever will” may come to Christ, are death blows to the theory that some were chosen by God for salvation, and others for damnation, before the world began. Perhaps no dogma has ever been so misguided.

Sources

• Barnes, Albert (1954), “Luke — John,” Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker).
• Bloomfield, S.T. (1837), The Greek Testament with English Notes (Boston: Perkins & Marvin).
• Reynolds. H.R. (1950), “The Gospel of John,” The Pulpit Commentary, H.D.M. Spence, Joseph Exell, Eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
• Shank, Robert (1961), Life in the Son (Springfield, MO: Westcott).

Does John 6:37 Teach Calvinist "Predestination"?

It is commonly alleged that Jesus, in John 6:37, endorsed the idea of "predestination" as popularized by John Calvin in the 16th century. Did he? Study this question with us.

christiancourier.com

Jn 6:36
But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
Clearly Jesus does not violate the free will of men. They freely chose to reject Christ as those Jews in Acts 13:46, they were not unconditionally predetermined by God to be unbelievers and lost no more than the Gentiles were unconditionally predetermined to believe and be saved. Jesus did NOT say 'I know you cannot believe no matter how hard you try', but instead they chose not to believe and will be held accountable for their own free will choice. God therefore does not force salvation (or condemnation) upon man thru predetermination violating man's free will.

 

[BlessedPeace]

As I said,the video is quite helpful in this matter.

Those who argue against God's Sovereign Election and irrevocable gift of Salvation will never be persuaded by God's Elect unto a change of mind and heart. Only God can do this.


The context matter is a matter of fact indeed. However, it cannot be used to actually renounce God's pre ordination of all things.Per his will that is exercised upon the earth as it is in heaven.

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.”​

 

[Arthur81]

Even AT Robertson, a Calvinist, rejects the idea that the Calvinist idea of election is found in Acts 13:48:

"As many as were ordained to eternal life (οσο ησαν τεταγμενο εις ζωην αιωνιον). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of τασσω, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an absolutum decretum of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away."


v46
"Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

God no more unconditionally predetermined those Gentiles to believe and be saved than He unconditionally predetermined those Jews to reject the gospel and be lost. Those Jews of their own free will rejected God's word (see also 1 Thess 2:14-16) and the Gentiles of their own free will determined themselves to hear God's word and believe, v42.

(1) the mis-interpretation of Acts 13:47 by Calvinists have one of God's elect/chosen BEFORE that person even believes. There is no example anywhere in the NT of one being of God's elect/saved BEFORE he believes.

(2) the context of Acts 13 Paul shows contrasting reactions of people when they are presented the gospel. In the first part of the chapter Paul deals with two individuals, Sergius Paulus and a sorcerer names Barjesus. Sergius Paulus of his own free will "desired to hear the word of God" while Barjesus of his own free will " withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith". This shows the contrast of two men in how they prepared their hearts in reception of the gospel, which relates to Christ's words in how men prepare their hearts (soil) to reception of the seed (word of God).

(3) Later in chapter 13 Paul shows the contrast between two groups, Jews and Gentiles. The Jews of their own free will, when they "saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming"and put the word of God away from themselves. While the Gentiles prepared their hearts to receive the seed "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath." v42.

So the contrast is between those of their own free will who determined themselves to reject the word of God against those of their own free will that determined themselves to be receptive to God's word.



(4) the meaning of the Greek word tasso is to set in order, to determine and can be either passive or active voice. The CONTEXT shows it would be in the middle voice, again, setting in contrast those that determined themselves to reject the word of God and would not believe versus those that determined themselves to be receptive to the word of God and believed. Therefore from Acts 13:47 the Gentiles determined themselves to be receptive to the word of God and as a result, believed. And it is those that believe that make up the chosen/elect of God that God saves. So the context is NOT about God having already 'chosen' these Gentiles and as a result they believed, but how the Gentiles belief resulted from them having prepared, tasso - determined their own hearts to receive the word of God.

(5) the context leading up to Acts 13:47 does not fit Calvinism:

--verse 42 " the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath" obviously the Gentiles were not totally depraved but were willing to hear and be receptive of the word of God. We cannot find in the context where they were 'unregenerate' and therefore had to first be 'regenerated' by the Holy Spirit before they would be able or willing to hear and understand the word of God.

--verse 43 "Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God." Persuasion had no place in a theology of determination. If God predetermined them to be in His grace and saved then for a certainty they will be saved and would be impossible for them to fall from God's grace. No sense or reason to "persuade them" when God is the one in 100% control of what happens.

--verse 47 "For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth." The phrase "ends of the earth" is figurative for any man any where of the earth, not limited to certain individuals. Salvation therefore is not limited but is for any and lost sinners anywhere even "unto the ends of the earth". (Isa 49:6)


Eze 18
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.
Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.


Eze 33:
Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live?
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?

God has not unconditionally predetermined some men to be lost for He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turn from his evil ways and live.

ET, you either did not read my OP carefully, or you are intentionally distorting what I wrote. I quoted from John Calvin's Commentary and said nothing about "Calvinism". A true "Calvinist" holds to the Five Points from the 1619/1620 Synod of Dort, which were the Five Point rebuttal to the Arminian's initial desire for corrupting the orthodox doctrine. In our day, you hear odd-balls who wish to say they are 3-Point Calvinists, or 4-Point Calvinists. So, today using the term "Calvinist" can mean most anything or often means nothing.

I quoted from John Calvin himself, since I find many bashing Calvin and Calvinism who ignorantly make crazy accusations without the biblical proof. This does not mean I agree with Calvin on all of his interpretations, but on these two verses it was important to point out his statements.

As to A. T. Robertson, I'd not noticed a full range of Calvinist doctrines in the RWP as I've used it, but I did a quick AI Search in Brave and found the following:

"Conclusion

Based on the available information, it appears that A. T. Robertson was not a strong advocate for classical Calvinism. While he was associated with Calvinists and worked within a denomination that had Calvinist elements, his own theological orientation and focus on language study suggest a more neutral or ecumenical approach. Therefore, it is unlikely that Robertson was a Calvinist in the classical sense."

Others can do their own research to see if Roberton was a true Calvinist.

In my study of Scripture, I consult the RWP, AMGL, Thayer's and the BDAG in researching the Greek, so I am aware of what the scholars state. Then scholars who do the translating can also consult the other Greek scholars. Sometimes they seem to 'parrot' a particular Greek-English Lexicon, or they decide based on the context of the verse itself. I gave a very wide range of translations on Acts 13:48; from the Roman Catholic Bible to a paraphrase such as the CEV and GNB. They agreed on the word, and it ain't "disposed"!

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Hi,

Should I follow a video or follow the inspired word of God that is the repository of God's truth?

The word of God does not teach that God's Sovereignty is about unconditionally, randomly choosing winners and losers when it comes to salvation regardless of man's free will....

Mt 23
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Jesus "would" but these Jews "would not" clearly showing man has free will and can use his free will to go against what God desires.wished for man.

If these Jews were predetermined by God to be lost before the world began, then why is Jesus lamenting over their being lost? God predetermined them to kill the prophets He sent to them so why is Jesus lamenting over what God caused/predetermined them to do? Why did Jesus desire them to be under His protective wing when He already knew they were predetermined not to?

On the other hand, if these Jews were predetermined to be saved, then why did they reject Christ Who is the only hope of salvation for them them?

Mk 10
And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
......
And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

If this rich man was predetermined to be lost, why did Jesus love him and not 'hate' him per Rom 9 according to Calvinism? Why did Jesus tell him what he could do whereby he 'SHALT have treasure in heaven' when he was already predetermined by God to SHALT not be in heaven? How was this rich man able or even care to obeserve the law or even know the law as he did or even desire to have eternal life if he were supposedly totally depraved?

If this rich man were predetermined to be saved, then why did he reject the only hope of salvation and go away grieved when he was predetermined to be saved?

=======

Jn 6:46
It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

God does His drawing by His word when men are "taught", have "heard" and "learned" then men come to God.
Simply put, God draws, men come.
God's drawing is not by force, it's not done apart from men being taught, hearing, learning God's word, it's not capricious or unconditional nor does it violate man's free will.....

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

How Does God Draw Men to Christ?​

In verse forty-five, Jesus reveals precisely how God draws people to Christ. Quoting from the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 54:13) and possibly alluding to Jeremiah 31:34, the Lord employs four verbs to stress the personal volition of human beings and the method employed in their being drawn to him. They must be taught, hear, learn, and come.

To ignore these inspired words is exegetically dishonest.

Taught​

The term “taught” is from the adjective didaktos. It’s found only twice in the Greek New Testament. The word has to do with “being taught, instructed” (Danker et al. 2000, 240).

In 1 Corinthians 2:13 it is employed of the teaching that ultimately originates with the Holy Spirit but is made known by means of words through men who convey the message — either those inspired originally or now by means of their words as recorded in Scripture.

Professor Merrill Tenney wrote: “Verse 45 indicates that God would do his drawing through the Scriptures and that those who were obedient to God’s will as revealed in the Scriptures would come to Jesus” (1981, 76; emphasis added). Bernard observed that the “drawing” was by “being taught” (1928, 205).

Some appeal to 1 Thessalonians 4:9 in an attempt to establish the theory that the teaching is in an internal, subjective instruction by the Holy Spirit (Hiebert 1971, 178).

“[Y]ou have no need to have any one write to you, for your yourselves have been taught of God.”

But the actual point here being made is that the teaching regarding brotherly love had been done previously. In fact, since their conversion, they had already understood that they all were family by virtue of a common new birth. Paul was simply reminding them that such an elementary matter did not need to be rehearsed in the present letter.

Hearing​

The word “heard” is important because it is preliminary to coming to Christ.

The verb is a past tense form of akouo. Mounce notes that there are at least five senses in which akouo is used in the New Testament. In this case, it is a hearing with a view to learning (2007, 327). In other words, it involves receiving information about something (cf. Danker et al. 2000, 38).

Learning​

“Learn” derives from manthano, “to gain knowledge or skill by instruction” (Danker et al. 2000, 615). It involves more than mere exposure to information. It embraces the idea of grasping the significance of what has been taught (Mt. 13:23). As Mounce observes, it “involves not only exposure to information but also comprehension” (2007, 397). It conveys the sense of “understanding” (cf. Mt. 9:13).

No one is qualified to “come to” Christ, or even needs to if he is incompetent to understand the rudiments of the gospel (Rom. 1:16). Paul’s statement in Romans 6:17 that gospel obedience is “from the heart” shows, among other things, “that our decision to surrender to God was our own choice and was not coerced or irresistibly imposed upon us” (Cottrell 1996, 413; emphasis added).

This nullifies Calvinism’s dogma of predestination, and denominationalism’s practice of infant sprinkling.

Coming to Jesus​

The fourth verb is “comes.” Only those who are taught the truth, listen intently with the motive of learning, and who understand the foundational elements of the gospel are qualified to come to Christ.

While coming is the result of God’s drawing by means of revealed truth, the term contains the implication that one has the ability when the preliminary requisites are satisfied to come to the Lord.

Coming is not the result of divine compulsion. It derives from an intellectual and emotional decision to surrender to the Savior. Simple logic provides a clear picture of the process.

• God draws. People come.
• Those who come, however, are those who have been taught, who have heard and learned.
• Hence it is perfectly transparent that God draws sincere people by means of gospel instruction by which people are taught, hear, and learn.

Jesus invited the people of certain cities in Galilee to “come unto me” (Mt. 11:28), and that invitation had resident within it the implied ability to obey. Why invite those to come, who simply cannot, because of an alleged depravity that holds them incapacitated by sin?

In the final days prior to his crucifixion, Christ wept over the city of Jerusalem, lamenting the fact that though he had longed to gather them under his protective care, they would not (Mt. 23:37). There is a vast difference between “would not” and “could not.” However, if a stubborn person practices “I won’t” long enough, it can become “I can’t” (Jn. 12:39). See also John 5:40 and Revelation 22:17 for the matter of free will.

Exploring the Divine Drawing Power of God through Jesus Christ

This article explores the concept of God's drawing power as demonstrated through the teachings and miracles of Jesus Christ. It delves into the interpretation of biblical passages and debates around free will and the influence of the Holy Spirit.

christiancourier.com

 

[Arthur81]

Hello, worms? No worries. Your can has now been opened.

So many say they read the Bible. I believe them.


Not many know what the Bible says.
Great thread!

You think maybe I used the name of "Calvin" to get a rise out of many? LOL

Most today are not aware that no historic or major denomination embraced Arminianism until John Wesley deleted the 17th Article of the 39 Articles of the C of E. The Methodists then became an official denomination about the same time as the USA declared independence, mid-18th century. The founding of the USA was pretty much based on the Calvinists! Even the 'work ethic' of America is called the Puritan Work Ethic, or Protestant Work Ethic.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

"Since you reject it and judge yourselves to be unworthy of eternal life, we are now turning to the Gentiles, for so the Lord has commanded us, saying, ‘I have set you to be a light for the Gentiles, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth. When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and praised the word of the Lord; and as many as had been destined for eternal life became believers." (Acts 13:46b-48 NRSVue)

Acts 13:48 -
"ordained to eternal life" KJV, RV, ASV, RSV, Douay-Rheims
"destined for eternal life" NRSV, NRSVue, ISV, NABre, Phillips, Amplified Bible
"appointed for eternal life" NIV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, YLT
"chosen for eternal life" NLT, GNB, CEV


1. I find no English translation that renders this "disposed" for eternal life. Calvin was surely correct: "For it is a ridiculous cavil to refer this unto the affection of those which believed, as if those received the gospel whose minds were well-disposed. For this ordaining must be understood of the eternal counsel of God alone." Calvin's commentary on Acts
2. Being ordained, destined, appointed or chosen by God, was prior to the persons believing
3. A man’s reprobation is ascribed by Scripture to man himself; but a man's salvation, ascribed to GOD alone, so the comparison of v46 with v48 is as in - The 1644 First London Confession of Faith (Baptist):

"And touching His creature man (Eph. 1:3-7; 2 Tim. 1:9; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:29-30), God had in Christ before the foundation of the world, according to the good pleasure of His will, foreordained some men to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace (Jude 4,6; Rom. 9:11- 13; Prov.16:4), leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice."

http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1st-london-1644-ed.pdf

there is one small but huge flaw in this thinking

why Did they say he was going to leave the jews and go to the gentiles

BECAUSE THEY DID NOT BELIEVE..

So in effect. Calvin got this part wrong.

A man being sent into eternal punishment is due to his sins, of which unbelief is also a sin; but a man being sent into eternal life is solely due to the mercy and grace of God in Christ. When men sinned in Adam and also in himself, God was under NO obligation to save anyone, period. Therefore, God is not unfair to save any number of mankind that he wills, none of men, or the "many" of Matt. 8:11.

Man is condemned because he did not believe, Jesus took the sin debt for the whole world.

He who believes is not condemned, he who does nto believe is condemned already.

Thats why he left the jew, in unbelief they were a lost cause, because Nothing God did the whole time he walked with them convinced them of their seperation of God. and turning to Jesus. so like he always did, their sin was complete. so he moved on,

so Calvin messed up on this issue also

"And the LORD said to Job: 2 'Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty? Anyone who argues with God must respond.' 3 Then Job answered the LORD: 4 'See, I am of small account; what shall I answer you? I lay my hand on my mouth. 5 I have spoken once, and I will not answer, twice but will proceed no further.' 6 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind: 7 'Gird up your loins like a man; I will question you, and you declare to me. 8 Will you even put me in the wrong? Will you condemn me that you may be justified?'"(Job 40:1-8 NRSVue)

"Can mortals be righteous before(or, more righteous than) God? Can human be pure before(or, more pure than) their Maker?" (Job 4:17 NRSVue)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance." (2Pet 3:9 NRSVue)

NRSVue, CEV, GNB wanting; RV, ASV, RSV wishing; KJV, REB, DRC, ABP willing

One view of God's will, want, desire or wish is one of decree, purpose, intention:
"In Christ we have also obtained an inheritance, having been destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will" (Eph 1:11 NRSVue)

"Whatever the LORD pleases he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps." (Ps 135:6 NRSVue)

"But he stands alone, and who can dissuade him? What he desires, that he does." (Job 23:13 NRSVue)

*If this will of decree is what is meant, the "all" has to be applied to the "saints", the "elect", "those who were destined"; or, you have a universal salvation, every person will repent, but that is wrong according to many of the scriptures.

It is Gods will that whoever sees and believes will not come to judgment, but has passed from death to life. (john 3, John 5 and John 6)

Lets take Jesus at his word. and not try to use a bunch of scripture which causes jesus to contradict himself

so yeah, Calvin got this wrong also

A second view of God's will, desire or wish in 2 Pet 3:9, it is the will of precept, what is commanded for man to do.
"The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the revealed things belong to us and to our children forever, to observe all the words of this law." (Deut 29:29 NRSVue)

"Do you imagine, whoever you are, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" (Rom 2:3-4 NRSV)

"He established a decree in Jacob and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our ancestors to teach to their children" (Ps 78:5 NRSVue)

"but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—" (Rom 16:26 NRSV)

Interestingly, the Jay Green's Literal reads "not having purposed" and the YLT "not counseling".

Calvin was right on this also: "But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel." Commentary on 2 Peter

They perish because of unbelief, The word says unless you believe you will die in your sins. It says whoever does nto believe is condemned already, Jesus even told the jews, you see, but you can not understand because you did not believe.

They hardened their hearts to God. and God allowed them to chose sin over him.

A holy, righteous, just and more importantly, loving God does this.. Because in the end, they have no one to blame but themselves. no one will ever blame God because God gave them an out, they chose to say no..

But Calvin in essence gives them an out. They can not understand so they could never even possibly believe. And we call this a loving God? I think not

so Yeah, Calvin got this wrong also

 

[Eternally Grateful]

As I said,the video is quite helpful in this matter.

Those who argue against God's Sovereign Election and irrevocable gift of Salvation will never be persuaded by God's Elect unto a change of mind and heart. Only God can do this.

Oh I agree, but we do not have to go to the complete opposite end of the equation and think Calvin has this all correct. While he has some things right, He is wrong on so many other things..

The calvinist view of election (double predestination) is in error. but he is perfectly correct in the fact That Jesus will never lose anyone given to him (salvation can not be lost)

The context matter is a matter of fact indeed. However, it cannot be used to actually renounce God's pre ordination of all things.Per his will that is exercised upon the earth as it is in heaven.

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.”​

Non of these passages prove calvin theology. One does not have to be a fatalist to understand and agree with every one of these verses.

 

[Arthur81]

When you hear and read people quote the Bible, by quoting just half of a sentence, BEWARE!

How often have you read or heard it stated:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" (John 1:12 KJV)

Notice the colon at the end of that verse, that verse is just half of the sentence. The full sentence reads:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13 KJV)

Who thinks that they brought about their own physical birth into their existence? It is just as true that dead men do not believe in order to be born again! They believe because they have been born again by a sovereign act of God! The infant is born and then it breathes, those that are born anew, they then believe. Paul states it well:

"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)" (Eph 2:1-5 KJV)

John's teaching on being "born from above" is described as mysterious and compared to the wind:

"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." (John 3:8 KJV)

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You think maybe I used the name of "Calvin" to get a rise out of many? LOL

Most today are not aware that no historic or major denomination embraced Arminianism until John Wesley deleted the 17th Article of the 39 Articles of the C of E. The Methodists then became an official denomination about the same time as the USA declared independence, mid-18th century. The founding of the USA was pretty much based on the Calvinists! Even the 'work ethic' of America is called the Puritan Work Ethic, or Protestant Work Ethic.

its ok, Many people believes in eternal security long before Arminian rejected the idea. but his thoughts were not new, The roman church rejected the idea of eternal security from the time they were born..

yet for some odd reason, the calvinist wants to attack the arminian, and not the roman..

 

[Eternally Grateful]

When you hear and read people quote the Bible, by quoting just half of a sentence, BEWARE!

How often have you read or heard it stated:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" (John 1:12 KJV)

Notice the colon at the end of that verse, that verse is just half of the sentence. The full sentence reads:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13 KJV)

Who thinks that they brought about their own physical birth into their existence? It is just as true that dead men do not believe in order to be born again! They believe because they have been born again by a sovereign act of God! The infant is born and then it breathes, those that are born anew, they then believe. Paul states it well:

"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)" (Eph 2:1-5 KJV)

John's teaching on being "born from above" is described as mysterious and compared to the wind:

"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." (John 3:8 KJV)

this is a typical fatal flaw of calvinism,

take a passage in writing (but as many as received him, even to them who believe) twist it tyo make it means something other than is what is said, then continue the passage, and use (not the will of man) which is referring to the fact a parent cannot will their kids to heaven, Kids cannot will their parents to heaven, I can not will myself to heaven) and make it as if we really did not receive or believe that God made us do these things.

The tax collector did nto will himself to heaven when he called out for Gods mercy

The one in Eph 1 and 2 did not will themselves to heaven when they recieved the gift of grace through faith and trust in God.

the world in John 3 did not will themselves to salvation, they in faith looked to the cross. as the jew looked to the serpent Moses hung on a pole.

The grace believer does not need to hide the rest of 1 John 1, he takes it in context of what it says.

If I recieve Christ in faith, I am given the power to become Gods child.

I did not have the power. I did nto have the will to make myself a child of God. my will means nothing, It is Gods gift. But I must recieve it in faith.

.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

You think maybe I used the name of "Calvin" to get a rise out of many? LOL

Most today are not aware that no historic or major denomination embraced Arminianism until John Wesley deleted the 17th Article of the 39 Articles of the C of E. The Methodists then became an official denomination about the same time as the USA declared independence, mid-18th century. The founding of the USA was pretty much based on the Calvinists! Even the 'work ethic' of America is called the Puritan Work Ethic, or Protestant Work Ethic.

ET, you either did not read my OP carefully, or you are intentionally distorting what I wrote. I quoted from John Calvin's Commentary and said nothing about "Calvinism". A true "Calvinist" holds to the Five Points from the 1619/1620 Synod of Dort, which were the Five Point rebuttal to the Arminian's initial desire for corrupting the orthodox doctrine. In our day, you hear odd-balls who wish to say they are 3-Point Calvinists, or 4-Point Calvinists. So, today using the term "Calvinist" can mean most anything or often means nothing.

I quoted from John Calvin himself, since I find many bashing Calvin and Calvinism who ignorantly make crazy accusations without the biblical proof. This does not mean I agree with Calvin on all of his interpretations, but on these two verses it was important to point out his statements.

As to A. T. Robertson, I'd not noticed a full range of Calvinist doctrines in the RWP as I've used it, but I did a quick AI Search in Brave and found the following:

"Conclusion

Based on the available information, it appears that A. T. Robertson was not a strong advocate for classical Calvinism. While he was associated with Calvinists and worked within a denomination that had Calvinist elements, his own theological orientation and focus on language study suggest a more neutral or ecumenical approach. Therefore, it is unlikely that Robertson was a Calvinist in the classical sense."

Others can do their own research to see if Roberton was a true Calvinist.

In my study of Scripture, I consult the RWP, AMGL, Thayer's and the BDAG in researching the Greek, so I am aware of what the scholars state. Then scholars who do the translating can also consult the other Greek scholars. Sometimes they seem to 'parrot' a particular Greek-English Lexicon, or they decide based on the context of the verse itself. I gave a very wide range of translations on Acts 13:48; from the Roman Catholic Bible to a paraphrase such as the CEV and GNB. They agreed on the word, and it ain't "disposed"!

I cannot call it scripture when scripture does not teach it......so I call it Calvinism.

Robertson was a Calvinist more then he was anything else.

 

[Arthur81]

I invite the readers of this thread to read my OP and see if it is reasoned well from Scripture, and presented orderly? Then read these various replies in opposition. Are they presented orderly, and logically reasoned from Scripture? Do the replies address the two specific verses of my OP, or do they go off on tangents not addressing those two verses.

Did I post an article about Calvinism"? No, I did not. I posted an exegesis and exposition of two specific, controversial verses, and I quoted from John Calvin on each verse. Typically the mere mention of the name Calvin is like smacking a hornet's nest. LOL

The Five Points called Calvinism came about almost 100 years after Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion".

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I invite the readers of this thread to read my OP and see if it is reasoned well from Scripture, and presented orderly? Then read these various replies in opposition. Are they presented orderly, and logically reasoned from Scripture? Do the replies address the two specific verses of my OP, or do they go off on tangents not addressing those two verses.

Did I post an article about Calvinism"? No, I did not. I posted an exegesis and exposition of two specific, controversial verses, and I quoted from John Calvin on each verse. Typically the mere mention of the name Calvin is like smacking a hornet's nest. LOL

The Five Points called Calvinism came about almost 100 years after Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion".

I invite the readers to look for truth. That is way more important than to look at what seems to be orderly or not.

 

[BlessedPeace]

Oh I agree, but we do not have to go to the complete opposite end of the equation and think Calvin has this all correct. While he has some things right, He is wrong on so many other things..

The calvinist view of election (double predestination) is in error. but he is perfectly correct in the fact That Jesus will never lose anyone given to him (salvation can not be lost)

Non of these passages prove calvin theology. One does not have to be a fatalist to understand and agree with every one of these verses.

The block so many have is to give John the credit,or condemnation.
Election and God's predetermining all things didn't come from John or those many men who preceded him and
brought those same teachings.

Those passages prove what God said.

Man gets in the way of that. God brought forth the doctrine of Predestination of all things and Election. God.For man.

 

[BlessedPeace]

You think maybe I used the name of "Calvin" to get a rise out of many? LOL

Most today are not aware that no historic or major denomination embraced Arminianism until John Wesley deleted the 17th Article of the 39 Articles of the C of E. The Methodists then became an official denomination about the same time as the USA declared independence, mid-18th century. The founding of the USA was pretty much based on the Calvinists! Even the 'work ethic' of America is called the Puritan Work Ethic, or Protestant Work Ethic.

Most who you will find here are deeply in hate of Calvin fail to realize God preceded all of those before and after John with the teachings of Predestination and Election.

Calvin and those before him , didn't put words in God's mouth. God put his words in theirs.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The block so many have is to give John the credit,or condemnation.
Election and God's predetermining all things didn't come from John or those many men who preceded him and
brought those same teachings.

Those passages prove what God said.

Man gets in the way of that. God brought forth the doctrine of Predestination of all things and Election. God.For man.

Yes, Man gets in the way

He who believes is not condemned,

he who does not believe is condemned already, because they did not believe

Man got in the way and rejected God and his gift., and will reap the reward of that unbelief

God will not be mocked.. or have his reputation tainted. He loved them, to the point of death, He did not reject them, They rejected him