Calvinism and "assurance"

[OU812]

You simply remind me why I usually don't answer your posts in the first place.

Because you have no answer, perhaps?

[Rdr. Arsenios]

I feel no obligation to rehash discussions that have been had here a million times, just because you want to argue. If that's "ducking," so be it. You simply remind me why I usually don't answer your posts in the first place.

Forgive me, my friend...
I do care about the issues...

Arsenios

[themuzicman]

Only given Arminian assumptions. If you're simply saying that "Given Arminian assumptions, Calvinism is wrong," then who could argue with that? But it's not a very interesting observation. What I thought you were trying to prove in this thread was that "Given Calvinist assumptions, Calvinism is inconsistent." That being the case, you have to frame your syllogisms in a way agreeable to Calvinist assumptions.

No, what I'm saying is that given Arminian assumptions, Arminians can claim to know based upon evidence their status with respect to being saved, and that given Calvinist assumptions the Calvinist cannot.

That's the point of the two syllogisms. One assumes Arminianism, one assumes Calvinism. Apples to apples.

[RBerman]

No, what I'm saying is that given Arminian assumptions, Arminians can claim to know based upon evidence their status with respect to being saved, and that given Calvinist assumptions the Calvinist cannot. That's the point of the two syllogisms. One assumes Arminianism, one assumes Calvinism. Apples to apples.

But you haven't actually demonstrated that. Your (allegedly) Arminian syllogism assumes that you can know whether you have faith. But I thought that was the very topic under discussion. Calvinsts don't claim to base their assurance on direct knowledge of God's decree, because we don't have access to that information. Calvinists base their assurance on the exact things you mention in your first syllogism. And as I previously noted, there's nothing uniquely Arminian about your first syllogism.

[themuzicman]

But you haven't actually demonstrated that. Your (allegedly) Arminian syllogism assumes that you can know whether you have faith. But I thought that was the very topic under discussion.

Actually, it's not, since Calvinist salvation is based upon arbitrary election, not faith. Which was the original point.

Calvinsts don't claim to base their assurance on direct knowledge of God's decree, because we don't have access to that information. Calvinists base their assurance on the exact things you mention in your first syllogism. And as I previously noted, there's nothing uniquely Arminian about your first syllogism.

Except that Calvinists are clearly in contradiction to their own doctrine in claiming that having faith assures them of anything, since their election isn't based upon faith.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Calvinsts don't claim to base their assurance on direct knowledge of God's decree,
because we don't have access to that information.

Then I admire your faith, for it vastly surpasses my own,
which by your standards can only be described as pathetic and weak, or even nil...

What Orthodoxy tells you is that if you DO the discipleship given by the Church,
you will come to know God for yourself, where you do not need anyone's words ABOUT God...
And as John records, "This is eternal life, that they know the one true God and His Son, Jesus Christ."

Such knowledge comes the hard and narrow and straited way...
Outside of this, we can only know ABOUT God, through what OTHERS
[like Luther and Calvin and Binny Hahn] TELL US...

The 'knowing God' that IS eternal life is NOT merely our knowing ABOUT God through others...
Instead it is one's participation in the Divine Nature [1 Peter]...
Discipleship that does not lead to this is but intellectual vanity...
When Christ told the Apostles: "Go, disciple the Nations"...
THIS is the discipleship He was instructing them to disciple...

Salvation is not proclaimed for oneself ever...
It is lived in fear and trembling and repentance...
In confession with Paul that I am the worst of sinners...
Salvation is not known in the syllogisms of Scripture...
But in the noesis of a broken and humbled heart... [Ps 50/1]
Salvation is known for it is knowing God that IS salvation...
But that knowledge is never proven to another...
Nor is it ever claimed for oneself...

Arsenios

[footwasher]

Actually, it's not, since Calvinist salvation is based upon arbitrary election, not faith. Which was the original point.



Except that Calvinists are clearly in contradiction to their own doctrine in claiming that having faith assures them of anything, since their election isn't based upon faith.

Good point!

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Except that Calvinists are clearly in contradiction to their own doctrine in claiming that having faith assures them of anything, since their election isn't based upon faith.

It is their theory of the inscrutable election by God of those whom God predestinates for salvation that is killer, together with their removing from merit the deeds of repentance that break down the walls of separation of man from God... They pay lip service to James statement that faith without works is dead, and then deny the life-giving role of works to the Faith of Jesus Christ which the disciple is acquiring through his discipleship...

Instead, ALL is by God's preselection - Faith itself is by preselection, so that nothing at all matters, what we do or do not do, for our salvation or against it... If we are one of the preselected ones, nothing we do or don't do matters a whit, and if we are not, the story is the same...

I mean, in the Church, we say that ANYONE who repents can join the choir of God's friends... We tell them that God desires that ALL be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth... Yet the only question for the Calvinist is: "AM I ONE OF THE ELECT?" And the kicker that the Calvinists then kill him with is that NO ONE CAN KNOW if they are one of the elect...

AND one MUST be justified by God in order to repent, so for the Calvinist, one cannot even repent without first being justified by God while still sinning... In the Orthodox Faith, one is justified by Baptism, the baptism of Christ, which enters one into Christ, which grants remission of one's sins... And this after being instructed in the Faith and demonstrating one's repentance from dead works... ANYONE ON EARTH CAN DO THIS... No exceptions... Most won't... Not because they cannot, but because they will not... And God foreknows who will and who will not... But in this fallen creation of both good AND evil, the human will is inviolate because God created man in God's Image... And we will be judged on our exercise in action of this inviolate will we have been given, for good or for evil...

Arsenios

[RBerman]

Actually, it's not, since Calvinist salvation is based upon arbitrary election, not faith. Which was the original point.

"Based upon" is vague. Calvinists affirm that we are saved through faith, and there's absolutely in the first syllogism to which I as a Calvinist object.

Except that Calvinists are clearly in contradiction to their own doctrine in claiming that having faith assures them of anything, since their election isn't based upon faith.

"Claiming to have faith" doesn't prove anything for anyone-- whether Calvinst, Arminian, Buddhist, Mormon, etc. But it we're talking about having faith, then a Calvinist who has faith is on at least as firm footing for assurance as anyone else. Arguably more, given the way Calvinism grounds perseverance in God's decree, but that's a different topic.

[footwasher]

"Based upon" is vague. Calvinists affirm that we are saved through faith, and there's absolutely in the first syllogism to which I as a Calvinist object.

But they can never have assurance with infallible certainty that their fiaith is genuine. Back to square one.


"Claiming to have faith" doesn't prove anything for anyone-- whether Calvinst, Arminian, Buddhist, Mormon, etc. But it we're talking about having faith, then a Calvinist who has faith is on at least as firm footing for assurance as anyone else. Arguably more, given the way Calvinism grounds perseverance in God's decree, but that's a different topic.

Yeah, let's stick to the issue: Calvinists can never have infallible certainty of their salvation. Their abnormal theology excludes it. Others, who have a normal view, can.

If a camera can produce an image everytime within the limitations and capability of its lens and sensor, is its ability to recognise data infallible? Sure.

That's how normal people who produce faith based on their recogntion of their own commitment and what Scripture says about that commitment function : infallibly.

[RBerman]

"Based upon" is vague. Calvinists affirm that we are saved through faith, and there's absolutely in the first syllogism to which I as a Calvinist object.

But they can never have assurance with infallible certainty that their fiaith is genuine. Back to square one.

"Claiming to have faith" doesn't prove anything for anyone-- whether Calvinst, Arminian, Buddhist, Mormon, etc. But it we're talking about having faith, then a Calvinist who has faith is on at least as firm footing for assurance as anyone else. Arguably more, given the way Calvinism grounds perseverance in God's decree, but that's a different topic.

Yeah, let's stick to the issue: Calvinists can never have infallible certainty of their salvation. Their abnormal theology excludes it. Others, who have a normal view, can.

If a camera can produce an image everytime within the limitations and capability of its lens and sensor, is its ability to recognise data infallible? Sure.

That's how normal people who produce faith based on their recogntion of their own commitment and what Scripture says about that commitment function : infallibly.

I wouldn't say that "normal people" have an infallible assessment of whether they have true faith. You'll meet plenty of people who thought they believed something but later decided they were mistaken. However, to whatever extent it's possible for men to be correct in their self-assessment of their own faith, Calvinists enjoy exactly at least as much confidence in the accuracy of their self-assessment as do Arminians.

[footwasher]

I wouldn't say that "normal people" have an infallible assessment of whether they have true faith. You'll meet plenty of people who thought they believed something but later decided they were mistaken. However, to whatever extent it's possible for men to be correct in their self-assessment of their own faith, Calvinists enjoy exactly at least as much confidence in the accuracy of their self-assessment as do Arminians.

Surprise, surprise! Not! I was expecting that. You should have been more careful there, RB, considering we've been through this before.

When a person believes the Gospel, God gives him the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit produces fruit, manifested in public confession that Jesus is Lord. No one can say Jesus is Lord unless he has the Holy Spirit. If you have the Holy Spirit you have the Son, and if you have the Son you have the assurance that you have salvation (see above).

To quote a wise saint,

RBerman wrote:

Note how Romans 10 links salvation to confession that "Jesus is Lord." It's difficult for us in America to appreciate what a dangerous thing this was in Roman days, but we do read about cases elsewhere in the world today which show that a profession of faith in Christ is no trivial and harmless thing. But in Paul's time, a "Lord" was a master, someone whose authority was obeyed. If you say you are joining a basketball team but never go to any of the practices or games, are you really on the team? Thus Matthew 7:21 reminds us that it doesn't help if you claim "Jesus is Lord" but don't actually act like Jesus is your Lord.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...a-person/page6

[RBerman]

When a person believes the Gospel, God gives him the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit produces fruit, manifested in public confession that Jesus is Lord. No one can say Jesus is Lord unless he has the Holy Spirit. If you have the Holy Spirit you have the Son, and if you have the Son you have the assurance that you have salvation (see above).

I would phrase some of this differently. That aside, to whatever extent these comments apply to Arminians, they apply to Calvinists as well.

[footwasher]

I would phrase some of this differently. That aside, to whatever extentu these comments apply to Arminians, they apply to Calvinists as well.

I'm not going to harass you RB, just going to ask you to reflect. Those are contradictions. Do people hold on to contradictions? They do if they are repeated long enough in a controlling environment (family, church,seminary). You can't say that false believers can be given the Holy Spirit. Once they believe the Gospel, they are given the Spirit:


2 The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Gal 3

False belief, true belief, both have received the Spirit if they confess Jesus as Lord.The two are misnomers. If you really think about it, ALL instances of belief are PARTIAL belief, incuding our own. We never thought about how Jesus saves, just that He is a Saviour. For Jews, THE Saviour. And Jesus accepts us.

We are clean (compliant, right with God, acceptable) because of the belief of the revelation Jesus have given us:
3You are clean already because of the word that I have spoken to you. John 15

They will be perfected (made mature) as they continue to believe further revelation (light):
1:7 But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 John

All this is consonant with Arminianism, belief leading to salvation, salvation being lost if one does not continue. Full assurance available as long as fruit is produced. Fruit of the tree: belief in Jesus; fruit of the Spirit: desire to do good.

To differentiate, Calvinism holds that false belief can lead to false fruit, false profession of Jesus as Lord, without the intervention of the Holy Spirit. .

13 Even Simon himself believed, and after he was baptized, he stayed close to Philip constantly, and when he saw the signs and great miracles that were occurring, he was amazed. Acts 8


Judas, not clean, never believed.

Ananias, Sapphira, Simon the Sorcerer: believed but allowed their old views to have precedence over their belief.

[RBerman]

I'm not going to harass you RB, just going to ask you to reflect. Those are contradictions. Do people hold on to contradictions? They do if they are repeated long enough in a controlling environment (family, church,seminary). You can't say that false believers can be given the Holy Spirit. Once they believe the Gospel, they are given the Spirit:

I didn't say false believers are given the Holy Spirit. I said that you were correct when you said that (true) believers have the Holy Spirit. Calvinists and Arminians believe that to be true. However, full Arminians lack prospective assurance, because they have no way of knowing whether they'll continue to have fruit in the future.