Jump to content
Online Baptist
arby

Refuting Verses of TULIP belief

Recommended Posts

I usually start out with Romans 8:27 to get the exact context that Paul is dealing with, and proceed to verse 28 & 29, with my comments inter-spaced as we talk.

Verse 27, "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit [only the saints have the Spirit] because he maketh intercession to the will of God." Verse 28 & 29, "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God [only a saint can love God], to them who are the called [the saved, the redeemed] according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also [also: in addition too after salvation: after being redeemed; after the Spirit enters the saint] did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." Please also take careful note Paul stated, "among the brethren."

I then concentrate on Romans 8:29 & 30 to bring out the 'foreknowledge' of God is before predestination, and to define the biblical definition of predestination, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.  Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and them he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

" And," and "also" are key words. In talking to the saints, Paul starts with "And," after salvation, also, in addition to, the saint is predestined to "be conformed to the image of his Son," and the other gifts of salvation from verse 30-39

If I have time, I generally talk in detail about verses 30 to 39 to show that there are other blessings every saint has after salvation.

I hope the above study helped.

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I continue my thoughts about the Calvinistic doctrines of TULIP, I need to add that my postings are a condensation of a Bible study that I did here on Taiwan, in Chinese, that I did in our Bible Institute of our church that we started. On Taiwan, the largest Christian denomination is the Presbyterians. The study on Calvin and his doctrines help our students understand Calvinism (TULIP) and the doctrinal errors of the Presbyterian Church. if I skip over any important parts, or you have a question that I need to clarify, please let me know.

Once I gone through Romans 8, I proceed to emphasize the foreknowledge of God. Foreknowledge precedes predestination. The Calvinist theory of predestination is that God elects those, or predestinates, individuals to either hell or heaven arbitrarily: in other  words man does not have a free will or is able to make a decision concerning salvation.

In emphasizing the foreknowledge of God I proceed to 1 Peter 1:1 & 2,"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." The saints are in the 'elect' according to the 'foreknowledge of God the Father.' God, in His foreknowledge of all events, especially in the eternal salvation of the soul, knows (does not predestinate), those individuals who will make the decision, out of his own free will, to get saved or not.

If there is still a problem with the foreknowledge of God, the sermon by Peter is useful; Acts 15:6-30. I need to make a note here. When we discuss a passage of scripture in our Institute we discuss the whole passage; not just one verse. I am condensing a whole lot in this posting. The apostle Peter stated, "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:14 We, including Calvin, cannot fully understand the foreknowledge of God, it is a mystery to our finite minds. Therefore, a lot of people have a problem with understanding salvation, what predestination really entails (Romans 8:29). Basically put, God knows who will be saved beforehand and who will not.

Alan

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand he doesnt go through all the verses of calvinism. Honestly - in my expierence, chasing verses is a waste of time. You will always just come back to "well your interpretation is wrong!", "no YOUR the wrong one". on and on and on.

Calvinism is inconsistent within itself and implodes if you run it out logically. Now you can be a consistent calvinist and there are many (RC sproul for example). Those people you wont convince. How do you convince someone that God wants all people saved when they believe God hand picked those for hellfire ? you don't you explain why their view of God is tyrannical and walk away. 

Edited by Gorship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gorship said:

I understand he doesnt go through all the verses of calvinism. Honestly - in my expierence, chasing verses is a waste of time. You will always just come back to "well your interpretation is wrong!", "no YOUR the wrong one". on and on and on.

Calvinism is inconsistent within itself and implodes if you run it out logically. Now you can be a consistent calvinist and there are many (RC sproul for example). Those people you wont convince. How do you convince someone that God wants all people saved when they believe God hand picked those for hellfire ? you don't you explain why their view of God is tyrannical and walk away. 

Of couse it is not logical to the sinful mind.  Neither is the crucifxtion and resurrection of Christ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is also not biblical. 

Thought up by a philosopher and developed and written down by a lawyer, neither whom were actually saved, what would you expect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in the way that Calvin and the followers of THAT MAN (as opposed to followers of the Bible) describe it.

You obviously don't know what they teach or you wouldn't even ask it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BroMatt said:

I've never meet a Calvinist that wasn't part of the elect. :4_6_100:

Unfortunately, I have.

A young man was convinced by another guy that Calvinism was true, but since he still suffered under the burden of sin, he also became concinced that he was not part of the elect. Since he was not, there was no hope for him, and he stopped following the Lord at all.

Calvinism is a dangerous heresy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Invicta said:

I don't know, you are correct, how do they describe it?

They do teach that we are depraved. The "T" stands for that, but it also actually stands for total "inability." While they teach that man fell and sin entered into the world, they go further (and, by the way, what Calvin taught, and what those who subscribe to what we call Calvinism, and the Reformed movement, originated with Augustine) and state that man is totally unable to choose to follow God or even accept salvation as it is offered.  That thought is further explained with the "I" - irresistible grace, which teaches that man can't choose either way. If God has saved you, you can't reject it.

As was said, unbiblical.

Most people who hear the "Total Depravity" have no clue the depths of what is meant when someone is following TULIP (or the newer ones: ROSES and GRACES).  That's why a lot of people say they are a 1- or 2- point Calvinist. They accept the T without knowing what it really means in that doctrinal system, and they accept the P, believing that perseverance is eternal security. But perseverance is not eternal security, it is actually a work. A person must keep to the right path, else they were never part of the elect (like the person Dave mentioned above). We are preserved by the Holy Spirit. Yes, we are to walk right. But we do not "persevere" to the end in order to prove we are part of the elect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that Calvinists teach Unconditional Election, but what is Corporate Election?  How does that differ from the Foreknowledge Election view?

I'm genuinely asking this without wishing to be controversial.

Edited by Bob from England
Spelling mistake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Invicta said:

I don't see the difference between foreknowledge and election. If He has foreknowledge we can't change it.

I have never heard of corporate election.

 

Ah but Invicta,

Isn't it more accurate and thorough to look at Foreknowledge as "knowing beforehand" who will believe of their own free will because He can see when they do, not manipulating them to believe? The word references knowledge, not action. See the difference? Therefore the question of whether we can change it or not is irrelevant IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to wretched:  You have made a valid point, brother.

The strict Calvinists say that Foreknowledge is an act, but those who hold to Foreknowledge Election believe foreknowledge is an attribute, ie, that God knows everything beforehand and He knows who will accept Christ, in accordance with that foreknowledge He then elects.

This is the line taken by Dr Noman Geisler in Chosen But Free.

I'm going to do some research on Corporate Election as it looks interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, wretched said:

Ah but Invicta,

Isn't it more accurate and thorough to look at Foreknowledge as "knowing beforehand" who will believe of their own free will because He can see when they do, not manipulating them to believe? The word references knowledge, not action. See the difference? Therefore the question of whether we can change it or not is irrelevant IMO.

That makes God dependent on us.  Did not God choose the Jews?  Of course he did, there was a thread that discussed this a week or two ago.

Just a general knowledge or an intimate knowledge?  Adam knew eve in an intimate sense, not a general sense. If it was just case, you might have had a point, but the NT is full of examples which however much you try, you can't explain away, Eph.1:1-11. for example.

Edited by Invicta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Invicta said:

That makes God dependent on us.  Did not God choose the Jews?  Of course he did, there was a thread that discussed this a week or two ago.

Just a general knowledge or an intimate knowledge?  Adam knew eve in an intimate sense, not a general sense. If it was just case, you might have had a point, but the NT is full of examples which however much you try, you can't explain away, Eph.1:1-11. for example.

Wouldn't it make much more NT sense to see that God in these last days has chosen all men, whether Jew or gentile to come to Him (way too many passages to list), just as He did with Abraham as an individual. It was still a choice God gave to Abraham and absolutely dependent on Abraham's acceptance and obedience.

Reformed theology relieves all people everywhere of their individual responsibility to believe the Gospel, it is contrary to every page of God's Word. What on earth would be the purpose of the Great White Throne if no one has a choice? What would be the purpose of Christ's life and ministry on earth in order to judge us all equally against His standard or if not, His Sacrifice on the Cross?  Reformed is a false religion and not of the Lord my friend. It ignores reason and accountability and is basically a spiritual welfare program. Oh sure, it breeds intellectualism but that is one of its biggest unScriptural problems making its followers lovers of intellectual men rather than lovers of God.  It is of the world and worships men and their studies more than Gods Word. Eph 1 is no battle cry for the reformed my friend, the reformed interpretation ignores the context and subject of the passage which is verses 4. 12-14. This passage has zero to do with any imaginary "hand picking" of saints.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wretched said:

Reformed theology relieves all people everywhere of their individual responsibility to believe the Gospel, it is contrary to every page of God's Word. What on earth would be the purpose of the Great White Throne if no one has a choice? What would be the purpose of Christ's life and ministry on earth in order to judge us all equally against His standard or if not,

No it doesn't, it teaches that God has sovereignty and man has responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)

×