Amillennialist

Calvin a spiritual successor to Muhammad

In Calvinism, Double Predestination, Spanish Inquisition, The truth about Islam on September 15, 2009 at 2:47 PM

I knew it!

Not only the conflating of destiny and omniscience, which in Calvin’s case destroys men’s souls by making the only Savior into a capricious monster, but other expressions of Islamic barbarism had to have warped the Christian culture it oppressed for centuries.  One institution completely alien to the Scriptures — but in line with Allah’s malevolence — was the Spanish Inquisition.

Though its evils have been exaggerated by those with an axe to grind against Christianity and Roman Catholicism, and though it was government that did the dirty work, the idea that people should be punished temporally for belief is foreign to the New Testament texts, but inherent to Islam’s.

Bad theology always causes problems.

On Muhammad’s influence on Calvin, from the great Diana West:

One of the most fascinating essays I’ve ever read about Islam in all these many years since 9/11 (when I first started reading essays about islam) is in the essential book, The Legacy of Jihad, by Andrew G. Bostom.

It is by the French theologian Jacques Ellul and it is called “The Influence of Islam.” The essay discusses the influence of Islam on Christianity — namely, what was “imported into Europe” from Islam that took root in Christianity.

Among other things, Elllul links the elevation of canonical law, the entrenchment of the divine right of kings, and the emergence of “holy war” as evidence of what he notes was a one-way cultural exchange propelled by contact, competition and war with Islam. Islamic influence was an import into Christendom, but there was no reciprocal export of Christian influence into Islam.

Another aspect of this influence that I remember being quite struck by when I first read the essay some years ago had to do with the emergence of Christian notions of “providence,” which, as Ellul writes “is never a biblical word” or concept, but was helped into Christian doctrine by the Islamic concept of submission, particularly the Muslim formulation mektoub, “It was written.” He writes:

From now on destiny and divine omniscience are conjoined. Believers can live in perfect peace because they know that everything was written in advance. The very formula “It was written” could only come from a religion of the book. Yet the Hebrew Bible and the Gospels never use such a formula. Thanks to it, the idea of predestination that was already haunting philosophical and Christian thinking received confirmation, forcibly established itself, and came to include double predestination (in Calvin), which, whether we want it or not, transforms the biblical God into destiny, Anamke, etc. And this derives from Muslim thinking.

Advertisements
  1. Good Grief! Mohamed Fadly's Back Again; this time he's talking down to Winfred Mann on Indisputable Proof (post). reb
    _________________________________

  2. Wow!! Really good stuff!

  3. Who was the great theologian who really brought Amillennialism to the forefront of the Church's thinking? I believe it was the same one influenced Calvin. If you think Muhammed influencd Calvin, I'd be willing to bet you never read Calvin.

  4. "If you think Muhammed influencd Calvin, I'd be willing to bet you never read Calvin."

    Did you actually read the connection Ellul made?

    Are you familiar with TULIP?

    Have you actually read Calvin?

    http://amillennialist.blogspot.com/2009/08/unlike-calvins-god-christ-loves-us-all.html

  5. Yes, as a matter of fact, I *have* read Calvin. To say he was influenced by Muhammed is ludicrous. He was influenced by St. Augustine – who brought Amillennialism to the forefront of the Church's thinking. Neither is providence an Islamic import into the Church's thinking, but a biblical doctrine found throughout the pages of Holy Writ.

  6. An affinity for straw men, Rev.?

    It doesn't say, "providence [was] an Islamic import," it says that providence "was helped into Christian doctrine by the Islamic concept of submission" (whatever happens, good or ill, is the will of Allah).

    That is not Biblical, for contrary to Calvin, it is not God's will that anyone should perish, but that all would turn to Him and be saved.

    Islamic fatalism combined with God's omniscience leads naturally to Double Predestination, so if Islamic "submission" did not actually influence European Christianity, and therefore, Calvin, then he came up with the heresy all on his own?

    Whether correlation or causation, the doctrine is from hell, the conflation of destiny and omniscience: "If God knows that some are going to heaven and some are going to hell, then He must have predestined both."

    That is not Biblical, either.

    And Calvin's despicable "sovereignty of God" is used to justify it.

    God is sovereign, but that's not what Calvinists mean. They mean that whenever Calvin's god does something stupid or diabolical like create a majority of humanity for hell, you can't question it, it's just "His sovereignty."

  7. So, Rev, what do you do with, "As God seals his elect by vocation and justification, so by excluding the reprobate from the knowledge of his name and the sanctification of his Spirit, he affords an indication of the judgement that awaits them"?

    The Biblical God does not deny men His Spirit or knowledge of Him:

    ". . . God our Savior . . . desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:3-4).

  8. Where's the straw man? What's the difference between saying providence was "imported" by Islam into Christianity and saying providence "was helped into" Christian doctrine by Islam? To say the doctrine of providence is not biblical is quite a staggering claim in light of such passages as Isaiah 46:8-11.

    Thanks for utilizing 2 Peter 3:9. Nonetheless, have you distinguished between God's will in the three ways in which Scripture does (decretive, preceptive, and disposition)?

    You blame Islam for the doctrine of double predestination. Not all Calvinists hold to that doctrine, but those who do look not to the Koran but to Romans 9.

    You state, "Islamic fatalism combined with God's omniscience leads naturally to Double Predestination, so if Islamic 'submission' did not actually influence European Christianity, and therefore, Calvin, then he came up with the heresy all on his own?" Long before Islam originated with Mohammed, St. Augustine was speaking about these doctrines at length. Augustine took his views particularly from Romans.

    You spoke of Luther elsewhere. Luther wrote more about predestination/election than did Calvin.

    What do I do with, "As God seals his elect by vocation and justification, so by excluding the reprobate from the knowledge of his name and the sanctification of his Spirit, he affords an indication of the judgement that awaits them"? I answer the reprobate suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom 1:18); they do not understand the truth nor seek after God (Rom 3:10-12); they do not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:14). Why does the Scripture say the Lord Jesus spoke in parables?

  9. you guys have way to much time on your hands, get a job, get married, have kids and stop blogging…

  10. Rev,

    ("Decree" is not "permit," as Sproul equivocates; even he must realize that splitting God into often mutually-exclusive and contradictory "wills" is nonsense.)

    So, did Calvin's god foreordain secretly (decretive will) that I would call it "stupid and diabolical"?

    Let's put it another way:

    Did Calvin's god foreordain that Adolf Hitler would murder six million Jews?

    Did Calvin's god foreordain that 70-80 million Hindus would die at the hands of Islam?

    Did Calvin's god foreordain that Muhammad would begin raping little, prepubescent Aisha when she was nine and he in his fifties, that Allah would call him a "beautiful pattern of conduct for those who want to please" him, and that Muslims would imitate him even in this, as resources and opportunity allowed?

    Calvin's god sounds an awful lot like Allah.

    You make God schizophrenic in order to justify your blasphemous nonsense by advocating a god which — contrary to Scripture — not only creates people for hell, denies them its spirit and knowledge of it, but also foreordains evil and contradicts itself.

    Why would a good, rational, omnipotent, and omniscient god foreordain (decretive will) that which is diametric to its revealed (preceptive) will and disposition?

    Do you realize how insane that is? How blasphemous?

    "What's the difference between saying providence was "imported" by Islam into Christianity and saying providence "was helped into" Christian doctrine by Islam?"

    Calvin's "providence" was not imported from Islam, "submission" was, and that Islamic fatalism obviously influenced the strain of "providence" that infected Calvin.

    "To say the doctrine of providence is not biblical"

    No, Double Predestination is not Biblical. Islamic-style fatalism is not Biblical.

    "Providence," like "grace," means very different things depending on whether or not Calvin's defining it.

    Calvin's "providence" conflated with omniscience leads to Double Predestination: "God is omniscient, he decrees all that occurs, so whatever happens is his will, he foreordained it. Since people go to hell, God must have predestined it."

    The Biblical (and Lutheran) conception of Providence, that God provides all we need for eternal life and all blessings in this one, is diametric to Calvin's, since Calvin's creates people for hell.

    "have you distinguished between God's will in the three ways in which Scripture does (decretive, preceptive, and disposition)?"

    No. For the reasons pointed out above, the concept is preposterous. God will not contradict Himself.

    That Calvin's god does is just one more characteristic it shares in common with Allah.

    "You blame Islam for the doctrine of double predestination."

    No, I blame Calvin.

    (But only those in denial of the historical facts and the plain meanings of words can deny that Islamic submission/fatalism bears an ungodly resemblance to Calvin's providence/predestination.)

  11. "Not all Calvinists hold to that doctrine, but those who do look not to the Koran but to Romans 9."

    I've not written about "all Calvinists."

    And they twist Romans 9 to justify Calvin's heresy.

    "St. Augustine was speaking about these doctrines at length."

    Augustine was arguing Double Predestination? He was arguing that God creates people for hell? He was arguing that God denies His Spirit to the vast majority of humanity He created for destruction? He was teaching that Christ died for only some, not all sinners? He was teaching that God's grace is irresistible, and therefore denied to all doomed by "divine" fiat to perdition?

    Shame on Augustine.

    Ellul's point above was that because of the force of Islamic oppression, its fatalism "confirmed forcibly" the idea of predestination/destiny, which in Calvin's case included Double Predestination.

    "Luther wrote more about predestination/election than did Calvin."

    Since the Bible teaches that God predestines to eternal life, Luther should have been teaching that.

    That God creates the vast majority of humanity for hell and denies His grace and Spirit and knowledge of Him is contrary to the Word of Christ, so for any flirtations with that damnable doctrine, Luther should have been ashamed.

    "the reprobate suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom 1:18); they do not understand the truth nor seek after God (Rom 3:10-12); they do not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:14)."

    You're missing a crucial point: All those characteristics of the "reprobate" belong to you also.

    In light of this, how do you know that you are going to heaven? That you are not one of those damned (literally!) reprobates predestined for hell?

    The truth is, you can't. You have no sure hope on which to hang your hat. It's a flip of a cosmic coin, Calvin's god's decretive will.

    On the other hand, if you would believe the Word of Christ, you would know that Jesus Christ died for the sins of "the whole world," and that means . . . you, too.

    "Why does the Scripture say the Lord Jesus spoke in parables?"

    Those who believed would understand, those who rejected Christ would not, and those who were curious but undecided would want to find out more.

    But you wanted me to say that Christ spoke in parables so that unbelievers would not be saved, right?

    Christ spoke to the Apostles in parables also. Does that mean He didn't want them to be saved?

    If Christ wanted to prevent people from being "healed," why did He ever speak plainly? Why did He explain His parables? Why did He preserve those explanations for all to see in the Gospels?

    If you are right that Calvin's god didn't want anyone to know what its parables meant (preceptive will, according to you), the fact that explanations of the parables are easily available to the world's reprobates (decretive will) means that Calvin's god secretly wanted reprobates to know what its parables meant.

    Decretive will — that god foreordained all that occurs — is a convenient way out of whatever God says that you don't like.

    Just like the Pharisees.

    Just like Muhammad.

    So, Calvin's god says one thing, but secretly wants another, and we don't find out until it happens?

    If Jesus spoke in parables to deny "healing" to unbelievers, why is it that on at least one occasion unbelievers understood a parable?

    "When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them" (Matthew 21:45).

  12. Mr."A". Some people ask, "why do you keep blogging at your age?"

    A cursory look at Mohamed Fadly's Last Two Posts,
    with Rory Stafford's wily comments on those last two are reason enough; Breath-taking Humor! reb

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  13. Amil:
    It doesn't appear from your response as though you truly desire to dialogue. Nonetheless, I'll close with the point that Calvin and the other Reformers didn't teach fatalism as does Islam. They taught that divine sovereignty and human responsibility are both true. This is much different than fatalism. To see an example of this in Scripture, along with the fact that the Bible teaches God's decretive will and preceptive will may differ – look at Acts 2:23 – "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men." It was God's decretive will, yet His preceptive will is clearly that human beings not murder one another. God is not schizophrenic. He clearly permits people to break His laws, yet He can even use their law-breaking to fulfill His purposes.

    As far as missing a crucial point – I'm not. I understand that those things are true apart from God's grace. If I've come to understand and seek after God it is a matter of grace, not my own strength, worth, goodness, or will. Where is my hope? In Christ alone.

    Thanks for letting me comment.

  14. regafa00101/parallels/delete!

    Sir Amillennialist –

    Dear Sir, I was thinking today of the striking parallels of two criminal enterprises, past & present:

    a) The Mafia, La Cosa Nostra (sicilian, and the world-wide Umma – Islam.
    b) Both are murderous kill-cultures.
    c) Both are Patriarchal.
    d) Both demand total submission.
    e) Both denigrate women.
    f) Manditory Life Membership – Apostates murdered.
    g) Contasting view: The Mafia demands "Omerta" (silence) – Islam promotes the Qur'an.

    I was hopeful that the eloquent Amillennialist might consider authoring his anonymous post of at least two or three pages…for our Snake Hunters weblog.

    I would be in your debt. – reb – 9/22/09

  15. "The very formula "It was written" could only come from a religion of the book. Yet the Hebrew Bible and the Gospels never use such a formula."

    this was clearly written by someone who has never read either the OT or NT.

    psa139:16 your eyes saw my unformed body.
    All the days ordained for me
    were written in your book
    before one of them came to be.

    Rev17:8 …The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished…)

    John12:37Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. 38This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet:
    “Lord, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”
    39For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:
    40“He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts,
    so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn—and I would heal them.”

    Prov21:1The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.

    Isa46:10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come.
    I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.’

    Prov16:4 The LORD works out everything for his own ends— even the wicked for a day of disaster.
    alt: The LORD has made everything for its own purpose, even the wicked for the day of evil. (NASB)

    Prov16:9 In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
    Prov16:1 To man belong the plans of the heart, but from the LORD comes the reply of the tongue.

    Isa45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.

    it's all over the scriptures for those who are willing to accept God's sovereignty.

  16. you said: "The Biblical God does not deny men His Spirit or knowledge of Him."

    not sure this is exactly true. our natural mind is hostile to God…we need to be born of the Spirit before that can change. (and it always amazes me that people can read in the bible about being "born again", "born of the Spirit" or "born from above" and think that their choice was the cause – as if their natural birth was their choice and not based on their parents' choices – the whole biblical metaphor of "birth" should tell you that it was the Father's choice and not yours.)

    Rom8:6The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.

    God first has to act to give us His Spirit before we can repent and start to move in His direction.

    Ezek36:26I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws…31 Then you will remember your evil ways and wicked deeds, and you will loathe yourselves for your sins and detestable practices.

    but God certainly has the right to reveal Himself or not – just because God revealed Himself to paul does not mean that He was obligated to do so with all the other pharisees.

    Luke10:21At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.
    22All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

    Matt11:21“Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” (compare Tyre and Sidon to Nineveh in Matt12:41 – had God chosen to reveal Himself to Tyre and Sidon as He did to Ninevah, they would have repented…)

    2Cor4:3And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    John3 says that the Spirit goes wherever He wants.

    Rom11:7What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, 8as it is written:
    “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day.”…25I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.

    John17:9I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. (note that when Jesus intercedes with the Father for protection from the evil one and unity, He prays only for His people – both current and future (v.20) – and not "the world.")

  17. you said: "The Biblical God does not deny men His Spirit or knowledge of Him."

    not sure this is exactly true. our natural mind is hostile to God…we need to be born of the Spirit before that can change. (and it always amazes me that people can read in the bible about being "born again", "born of the Spirit" or "born from above" and think that their choice was the cause – as if their natural birth was their choice and not based on their parents' choices – the whole biblical metaphor of "birth" should tell you that it was the Father's choice and not yours.)

    Rom8:6The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.

    God first has to act to give us His Spirit before we can repent and start to move in His direction.

    Ezek36:26I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws…31 Then you will remember your evil ways and wicked deeds, and you will loathe yourselves for your sins and detestable practices.

    but God certainly has the right to reveal Himself or not – just because God revealed Himself to paul does not mean that He was obligated to do so with all the other pharisees.

    Luke10:21At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.
    22All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

    Matt11:21“Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” (compare Tyre and Sidon to Nineveh in Matt12:41 – had God chosen to reveal Himself to Tyre and Sidon as He did to Ninevah, they would have repented…)

    2Cor4:3And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    John3 says that the Spirit goes wherever He wants.

    Rom11:7What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, 8as it is written:
    “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day.”…25I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.

    John17:9I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. (note that when Jesus intercedes with the Father for protection from the evil one and unity, He prays only for His people – both current and future (v.20) – and not "the world.")

  18. Dialogue?

    Is that like "talks without preconditions"?

    Can you show from Scripture that God says:

    -He denies His Spirit to those who end up in hell?

    -He denies knowledge of Himself to those who end up in hell?

    -He denies His grace to those who end up in hell?

    -He creates people (the vast majority of humanity) for hell?

    -He denies Christ's atoning sacrifice to those who end up in hell?

    Merriam-Webster: Fatalism is in general the view which holds that all events in the history of the world, and, in particular, the actions and incidents which make up the story of each individual life, are determined by fate.

    Westminster Shorter Catechism: Decretive will:
    The decrees of God are his eternal purpose, according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.

    YHWH declared from the Beginning (literally) that the Messiah would suffer for all humanity. Through His prophets He stated plainly what His intentions were for the Messiah (see King David, the Prophet Isaiah, etc.).

    There was nothing secret about what God intended to do in His Son.

    No, your hope is that God predestined you to eternal life, which is no hope at all, since the odds are, you're one of those predestined for hell, for whom Christ did not die, and to whom the Holy Spirit, God's grace, and knowledge of Him are denied.

    It's better to say what God says. No more, no less.

  19. "No, your hope is that God predestined you to eternal life, which is no hope at all, since the odds are, you're one of those predestined for hell, for whom Christ did not die, and to whom the Holy Spirit, God's grace, and knowledge of Him are denied."

    Dialogue means to discuss an issue in a courteous manner, despite differences. I find it ironic you argue so vehemently for God's love for all, yet fail to reflect that truth. My hope is not in my own righteousness, goodness, or will, but in Christ alone.

    Fatalism teaches that everything is decided by fate – which is nothing less than impersonal chance. Scripture, on the other hand, teaches that God, who is merciful, "works all things according to the counsel of His plan" (Eph. 1:11). Yes, it is better to say what God says. No more, no less.

    – The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin, righteousness, and judgement. He is not poured out upon unbelievers. (Jn 16:8-11; Acts 2)

    – Those who end up in Hell deny the knowledge of God they have. (Romans 1)

    – God's common grace is given to all (Matthew 5:43-48), His electing grace is not. While believers were "by nature children of wrath," they have been appointed to eternal life (Ephesians 1-2).

    -The favorite strawman – "He creates people (the vast majority of humanity) for hell".

    – Those who reject Christ as offered in the gospel deny the atonement for themselves. There is nothing flawed with the atonement. The problem exists with sinful human beings.

  20. James,

    "Dialogue means to discuss an issue in a courteous manner, despite differences. I find it ironic you argue so vehemently for God's love for all, yet fail to reflect that truth."

    What exactly is "courteous" about making Christ a liar?

    Does "love" means tolerating evil courteously?

    Does "love" mean that when faced with vile lies about the Son of God, we should refrain from exposing them?

    Isn't it more the content, rather than the style, of my comments that troubles you?

    When John the Baptist characterized the religious leaders coming to him to be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins as "vipers," was that "failing to reflect the truth of God's love"?

    When Jesus described them as "white-washed tombs full of dead men's bones," was that "discourteous"?

    When Christ called those who contradicted His clear word "children of satan," was that "impolite"?

    When Jesus drove thieves out from the Temple — with a whip — was that "uncivilized"?

    When the Apostle Paul wished that the Judaizers would emasculate themselves, was that "rude"?

    I've neither called you names, used violence against you, nor wished for your dismemberment.

    I have written strongly against that which makes Christ a liar and destroys men's souls.

    I would think a Christian would appreciate that.

    If you can demonstrate my error from Scripture, please do so.

    My hope is not in my own righteousness, goodness, or will, but in Christ alone.

    On the face of it, that sounds good, but if you hold to Calvin's heresies (is that "uncivil"? There I go again!), then you have to admit that you don't really know whether or not Calvin's god has foreordained you to heaven or hell.

    IT'S A SECRET.

    In fact, statistically-speaking, since Christ said that "many" find the road to perdition and "few" find the road to eternal life — a trip for which the tickets have already been purchased, according to your man Calvin — odds are you're one of the many predestined for hell.

    It could very well be that Calvin's god's Decretive Will has you set up to think you're a Christian for a while, but then at the end to fall away.

    I've heard your people state that before: "We all thought he was a Christian, but since he lost his faith at the end, it is obvious (Decretive Will!) that he never really was a believer."

    Since you admit you cannot know Calvin's god's Decretive Will, you cannot know whether or not Christ died for your sins, either.

    You cannot know whether or not you're just being deceived — according to Calvin's god's "divine sovereignty"! — into thinking that you're a Christian just so that in the end your utter destruction shows his glory even better!

    (Isn't that how the song goes?)

  21. James,

    Do you not see that Calvin's heresies rob not only unbelievers in need of the Savior (but who instead find a monster), they also steal from Christians the eternal confidence and comfort in Christ's atoning sacrifice for them (because it was for all), assurance He bought for them with His own blood?

    "Fatalism teaches that everything is decided by fate – which is nothing less than impersonal chance."

    And Calvin's god has foreordained all that occurs, including the "many" He created for hell, chosen for that fate by "divine" fiat. (Which was the point of Ellul's connecting Islamic submission and Calvinistic "providence"/predestination/Double Predestination.)

    "Scripture, on the other hand, teaches that God, who is merciful, "works all things according to the counsel of His plan" (Eph. 1:11)."

    It truly is "on the other hand."

    So, where does Scripture say that God's "plan" is to create the "many" for hell? That Christ died for only a "few"? That He denies His Spirit, grace, and knowledge of Him to the "many"?

    "The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin, righteousness, and judgement. He is not poured out upon unbelievers. (Jn 16:8-11; Acts 2)"

    How can the Holy Spirit convict "the world" of sin if He does not go to "the world"?

    Where do the Scriptures state that the Holy Spirit denies Himself to the "many" foreordained to hell?

    "God's common grace is given to all (Matthew 5:43-48), His electing grace is not."

    Where does Scripture say that?

    "While believers were "by nature children of wrath," they have been appointed to eternal life (Ephesians 1-2)."

    That speaks of believers.

    Where does Scripture say that God foreordains the "many" going to hell for it?

    "The favorite strawman – "He creates people (the vast majority of humanity) for hell"."

    I agree that that is false. But that's Calvin's false doctrine, not mine.

    "Those who reject Christ as offered in the gospel deny the atonement for themselves. There is nothing flawed with the atonement. The problem exists with sinful human beings."

    Are you not aware that your buddy Calvin's teachings state that the Atonement is "limited"? That Calvin's god denies its grace, spirit, and knowledge to the "many"?

    Those people are in hell because Calvin's god "foreordains all that occurs," including their sin and unbelief.

  22. Sir Amillennialist,

    Now Mohamed Fadly attacks me; he says I'm using "reviles"…I just posted two comments, answering his false accusations! I have them in print. He's getting desperate in front of his new "friends". Have a look before he deletes it.

    reb

  23. That is a tactic typical of those working in defense of tyranny, of liars and cowards.

    Shame on him.

    Keep up the good work, Reb!

    A.

  24. you said: "How can the Holy Spirit convict "the world" of sin if He does not go to "the world"?"

    well, what does "the world" mean?

    1John2:2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

    the bible tells us that john was specifically called to minister to the jewish believers (Gal2:9). if you've read the NT, you know that the primary issue facing the young church was "what to do with the gentiles?" (the first council in acts15).

    so in this comment, john is just repeating something he taught in his gospel account – something his jewish listeners needed to hear – that Jesus died not just for jewish believers but also for the believing gentiles or the "world."

    john11:51He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

    Jesus did die for the "world" – meaning people "from every nation, tribe, people and language" (rev.7:9) and the Spirit does convict them and soften their hearts – but not necessarily "every single person."

    rather, He died for His people (Matt1:21), His sheep (John10), His friends (John15:13), His church (eph5:25)…those for whom He is interceding (rom8:32-34). so again i point you to john17:9 – Jesus intercedes on the basis of His sacrifice…and the atonement was for believers only – therefore, He refuses to pray for the rest of "the world."

    you said: "Those people are in hell because Calvin's god "foreordains all that occurs," including their sin and unbelief."

    the bible teaches that God's foreordaining of sin does not absolve the guilty. paul quotes you in romans 9:19 – the greeks believed in man's philosophy just as you argue for it now – please listen to the response.

    Rom9:17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

    19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

    22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

    God is sovereign and man is responsible. why do you disagree? is your ultimate foundation the scriptures or man's philosophy which teaches that we must have the ability to act obediently before God can hold us responsible? (the bible says that we must love God with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength – is God evil to hold us responsible to obey that command even while we lack the ability?)

    (BTW, please delete my 3rd post above as it is an accidental double post.)

  25. Interesting speculation. I wonder if Augustine was an influence on Mohamed.

  26. chalee,The very formula "It was written" could only come from a religion of the book. Yet the Hebrew Bible and the Gospels never use such a formula."this was clearly written by someone who has never read either the OT or NT.Since the author makes the point that only a Jew, Christian, or Muslim could make the statement "It was written . . . ," and then says that the Biblical texts "never use such a formula," he must have "read both the OT and NT."He can't be implying what you're inferring without contradicting himself.To what "formula," then, is the author referring?Islamic fatalism mutated into hell-as-predestiny, which is what Calvin advocated.it's all over the scriptures for those who are willing to accept God's sovereignty.There's the problem. Your "God's sovereignty" is code for "Calvin's god creates people for hell."The only problem is, Scripture nowhere states that."It's all over the scriptures" only for "those who are willing to deny God's sovereignty," for if God is sovereign, should you not obey Him?

  27. chalee,The very formula "It was written" could only come from a religion of the book. Yet the Hebrew Bible and the Gospels never use such a formula."this was clearly written by someone who has never read either the OT or NT.Since the author makes the point that only a Jew, Christian, or Muslim could make the statement "It was written . . . ," and then says that the Biblical texts "never use such a formula," he must have "read both the OT and NT."He can't be implying what you're inferring without contradicting himself.To what "formula," then, is the author referring?Islamic fatalism mutated into hell-as-predestiny, which is what Calvin advocated.it's all over the scriptures for those who are willing to accept God's sovereignty.There's the problem. Your "God's sovereignty" is code for "Calvin's god creates people for hell."The only problem is, Scripture nowhere states that."It's all over the scriptures" only for "those who are willing to deny God's sovereignty," for if God is sovereign, should you not obey Him?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: