Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Calvinist View of 1 Timothy 4.10

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Calvinist View of 1 Timothy 4.10

    In Romans 9, Paul discusses God’s absolute freedom in His saving purposes. He uses the illustration of the twins, Jacob and Esau, stating that God’s choice of Jacob over Esau had nothing to do with either of them. Rather, God chose “so that [His] purpose according to His choice would stand.” This choice was “not because of works but because of Him who calls” (Rom 9:11). He goes on to say that salvation “does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (Rom 9:16), and then supports that claim by referring to God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart for the expressed purpose of demonstrating His power and proclaiming His name through the events that followed (Rom 9:17); cf. Exod 9:16). Paul then summarizes his point by declaring: “So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires” (Rom 9:18).

    Then, Paul anticipates an objection: “You will say to me, then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’”

    First, let us understand the objection itself. Paul’s imaginary (or perhaps not so imaginary) interlocutor has understood all that Paul has said about God up until this point.

    He understands that salvation is entirely a work of God’s grace, and owes to nothing in man.
    He also understands that it is God’s will, not man’s will, that is determinative and decisive in salvation (again, Rom 9:16; cf. John 1:13). He asks a rhetorical question to underscore this very point: “Who resists His will?” That is to say, “No one resists God’s will.” “Our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Ps 115:3). He accomplishes all His good pleasure (Isa 46:10), and no purpose of His can be thwarted (Job 42:2).
    The objector also understands that God still holds man accountable. “He still find[s] fault.”
    So the question is, “Since no one can resist God’s will, how is it fair that He still finds fault?”

    Making Sense of the Objection

    This objection proves very helpful in the Christian’s understanding of the nature of God’s sovereignty in salvation. Because whatever our conclusions are about the doctrines of grace, they must make sense of that objection.

    And the fact is: the only way that this objection makes any sense at all is if three things are true: (1) Man ought to repent and be saved as commanded by God, (2) Man lacks the moral ability to repent and be saved, and (3) God still holds man accountable to repent and be saved, and will punish them for their failure to do so. In philosophical terms, this objection only makes sense if “ought” doesn’t imply “can”—that is, if commanding something of someone does not necessarily mean that they are able to do what you command. In theological terms, this objection only makes sense if the doctrines of total depravity, unconditional election, and irresistible grace are true.

    But it is repugnant to the natural mind that we could be held accountable for something that we are unable to do—especially if we claim that it is a loving God that imposes this standard. And so different schools of thought devise alternative understandings of God’s sovereignty in an effort to save Him from what they believe to be unfair. However, none of these alternatives make sense of the objection in Romans 9:19. Let’s consider these alternatives.

    Universalism

    One alternative is universalism. God has required something of humanity that they are unable to do, so he brushes their sins under the rug—after all, kids will be kids, right?—and He lets them off the hook. Now, aside from being patently unbiblical, this position would be to deny that God “still finds fault” with humanity. No one can resist His will, so He simply does not find any fault with them.

    Conditional Election Based on Foreseen Faith

    Another alternative is to deny that God’s election is unconditional, and rather to assert that it is conditioned upon faith which God foresaw in a particular person. Said another way: He chose them because He knew they would choose Him. Since our natural minds find it unfair to hold people accountable for something they are unable to do, this theological position maintains that we actually were able to do something—namely, believe—that would result in God granting us mercy.

    But if this were the case, Paul’s imaginary companion would not have made the objection in Romans 9:19. It would be no mystery as to why God “still finds fault” with those who do not believe. They simply did not have the faith necessary to be elect.

    Libertarian Free Will

    Still another alternative, akin to the previous, is to claim that God is indeed sovereign, but God has sovereignly chosen to grant a sort-of-sovereignty to humanity in the form of libertarian free will. God commands repentance and faith, and He will find fault in those who fail to repent and believe. But according to this view, those who fail to repent and believe do so because they have the free will to accept or reject God. God did His best, and He would save everybody if He could, but He left the final decision for salvation up to man. In other words, they can “resist His will.”

    Here again, we find that the objection in 9:19 would make no sense. There would be no mystery as to why God would find fault with those who reject Him. But Paul’s interlocutor makes the statement (via a rhetorical question) that no one resists God’s will.

    The Genius of Grace

    And so, if we are to make any sense of the objection Paul raises in Romans 9:19, we cannot explain God’s sovereignty and man’s inability by appealing to conditional election or libertarian free will. This objection only makes sense if the Calvinistic doctrines of total depravity, unconditional election, and irresistible grace are true.

    But how is that fair? How can God command that which is impossible, and still hold people accountable? How can He command people to be born again, even though the new birth depends entirely upon “God, who has mercy” (Rom 9:16)? Well, Paul’s answer is to rebuke the questioner who seeks to impugn the righteousness of God: “On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?” (Rom 9:20). If you seek to find fault with God’s character, you have a skewed understanding of righteousness (Rom 9:14; cf. 3:5b–6) and better put your hand over your mouth fast.

    But there is a way to ask the question out of a sincere desire to understand God and worship Him for how He has revealed Himself. And if the question is asked in that spirit, I believe there is a clear answer. And that is: God grants to His people what He requires of them.

    This is the genius of grace. By commanding something of everyone that is impossible for them to do, God magnifies mankind’s true helplessness and inability related to our spiritual condition. And because He commands only what is possible for God Himself to accomplish, He magnifies His own sufficiency and fullness of glory. As Paul goes onto explain, He does this “to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy” (Rom 9:23).

    By granting what He requires, God displays Himself as all in all. He places humanity in our proper position, as needy beggars eager to receive from His hand. Then, as our benefactor, He grants what He requires and thus captures our affections, so that we see Him as altogether lovely, altogether worthy, and altogether wonderful.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    The Arminian Interpretation - God wants to save everyone but His desire is many times thwarted by the obsinate free will of man. God is able to save all men, but though all can be saved, only believers actually are. Certainly this is a popular view, but we must be clear that this is not what the text says. It does not say God wants to save, but that He actually saves: He is actually the Savior (in some sense) of all men.

    (3) The Reformed Interpretation - God is the Savior of all men (in one sense) and especially of those who believe (in another sense). Let me be quick to say that this is not the only way reformed people have understood this verse, but I do believe this is the correct interpretation.

    As we study the terms "salvation" and "Savior" we find many nuances - many different ways - God saves. The most important aspect of salvation is to be "saved" from the wrath of God (Romans 5:6-9; 1 Thess. 1:10), but salvation also includes the idea of rescue from enemy attack (Psalm 18:3); preservation (Matt. 8:25); physical healing (Matt. 9:22; James 5:15), etc. God "saved" not only Paul's life but everyone else on board ship with him in Acts 27:22, 31, 44. There are numerous ways that "salvation" takes place, but that's a complete Bible study all in itself.

    When we study the word Savior (Greek: soter) in the LXX version (Greek translation of the Old Testament), we see the word used in a way that is far less grandiose than that which we generally think of the word. One example is Judge Othniel, who is called a Soter (Savior) or deliverer because he delivered the children of Israel from the hands of the king of Mesopotamia (Jud. 3:9). 2 Kings 13:5 talks of God giving Israel a "Savior" so that they were delivered from the hands of the Syrians. The judges of Israel were "saviors" as Nehemiah 9:27 states, "in the time of their suffering they cried out to you and you heard them from heaven, and according to your great mercies you gave them saviors who saved them from the hand of their enemies." (see also Psalm 36:6)

    A great deal more could be said to substantiate this idea of a savior, but I think the above would make the point. God provides food (Psalm 104:27, 28), sunlight and rainfall (Matt. 5:45), as well as life and breath and all things (Acts 17:25), for "in Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). God preserves, delivers and supplies the needs of all who live in this world, and it is in this sense that He extends grace to them, saving them from destruction every day they live.

    God is also gracious in allowing many to hear the proclamation of the Gospel.

    All of these mercies are refered to as "common grace." It is common only in the sense that every living person gets it. This grace should actually amaze us because God is under no obligation whatsoever to give it to anyone. It can never be demanded. God sustains the lives of His sworn enemies, often for many decades! However, as wonderful as it is, it is only a temporal grace because all unregenerate people eventually die and will face the judgment (Heb. 9:27).

    I believe then that 1 Timothy 4:10 teaches that we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior (Soter - preserver, sustainer, deliverer) of all people (showing mercy to all, each and every day they live), especially of those who believe (who receive full salvation from His wrath and everlasting life).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,033
    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    What mercy is shown to a person whom God gives no opportunity for salvation? What love is that? It makes the cross of Christ impotent unable to reach everyone. Whereas the Christian God can reach everyone, but sadly, not everyone receives God's hand.

    The way you read 1 Tim. 4.10 is nonsensically redundant... "God is the Savior of all men [but not from Hell], specially those who believe."

    Do you see the problem? "Specially those who believe" has to be a subset of "Savior of all men [but not all from Hell]" as indicated by the word "specially." But "specially those" as a subset of "Savior of all men" must entail the same nature and not limit God's grace.

    If it were true "God is the Savior of people [not for Heaven], specially those who believe," how can those who "specially believe" be included with those "[not for Heaven]"? Let us accept the basic understanding Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the whole world that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but receive everlasting life.

    Satan tries to masquerade himself as an angel of light claiming God is the Savior of people not from being saved from Hell. Totally sadistic! That would be like me saying to you, I would be happy to help you build a home, but after I am done, I will lock you up in the house a prison for life, but you should be ok with that since I was so full of grace to you in building your house.

    Whereas an OSAS Arminian reads consistently, for "God is the Savior of all men [providing sufficient grace, opportunity for all], specially those who believe."

    The latter "specially those who believe" is congruent with "Savior of all men" since everyone is provided the opportunity with sufficient grace to have the free choice, then those who are saved would be those who "specially believe." I've never met a child, who is simple in heart, to this day who would read it any other way. Your monster reading reflects your dead conscience.

    The passage simply cannot be reworked around to agree with Calvinism as explained. Thus, you are not a Christian and worship a false Christ. The Bible warns us there would be many false Christs. Nobody should deem you to be a member of the "little flock" (Luke 12.32) body of Christ.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    156
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rdftreeman View Post
    He also understands that it is God’s will, not man’s will, that is determinative and decisive in salvation.
    The question is not whether it is God's will that is determinative and decisive, for of course, it is God's will that saves. The issue, rather, is what God are we are talking about by how He determines decisively who receives regeneration? Is it the Calvinistic God who irresistibly imposes salvation and doesn't give man ample grace to have the free choice OR is it the OSAS Arminian God who provides sufficient grace to all have the free choice? Which God is bigger and greater?

    God determinatively and decisively saves those who repent to the cross as helpless sinners to be regenerated. Therefore, by this, we know Calvinists are not Christians. Calvinists by their own will assume they are irresistibly selected so they would not be saved, for man is not saved by the flesh, willing himself into salvation, his own strength and plans.

    Calvinists are going to Hell because they are unwilling to repent to the cross as helpless sinners to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior. They worship a false Christ.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What About 1 Timothy 4.10?
    By everstill in forum Totally Depraved
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-01-2009, 12:42 AM
  2. How do you view Galatians 3.19?
    By Scriptur in forum Sabbatarians
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 12:38 AM
  3. Amillennialism - the most common view
    By Churchwork in forum Partial Rapture
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-15-2007, 11:32 PM
  4. The most encapsulating view of our future
    By Churchwork in forum Partial Rapture
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-22-2006, 05:11 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •