Calvinism - Another Heresy

[Desdichado]

I'm rather happy to see somebody criticize Calvin on the basis of his proclivity toward mystery.

Quite refreshing after all the discussions with Eastern Orthodox people I've been having of late.

 

[Calmador]

"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called."
Rom 8

Following the verse in the quote... yet all who were called... were not chosen. If God has decided that his calling would be irresistible then all who are called would be chosen... but...

Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

The truth is his call does not seem irresistible here. God in his sovereignty may have decided that his calling BE resistible.

 

[StanJ]

This is a rather strong topic of debate within the Reformed community. Many are aware of Calvin's thoughts on the matter...and disagree.

Oh the Paedo-Credo debates. How they rage and rage.

From my perspective, rage seems to be the standard M/O when debating with Calvinists.

 

[Desdichado]

Idk, maybe it is because we're so often met with debates that start with straw men being tossed at us.

It isn't very Christian, but I must admit it's difficult not to be a rage monkey when brothers and sisters start debates as rage monkies based on flawed premises.

From my perspective, rage seems to be the standard M/O when debating with Calvinists.

 

[Zmouth]

Idk, maybe it is because we're so often met with debates that start with straw men being tossed at us.

Any examples of those straw men that have been thrown at you?

 

[Calmador]

Idk, maybe it is because we're so often met with debates that start with straw men being tossed at us.

It isn't very Christian, but I must admit it's difficult not to be a rage monkey when brothers and sisters start debates as rage monkies based on flawed premises.

There's an arrogance and bitterness with certain Calvinists. The Calvinists I've met in my life have been un-Christ like. Sometimes I parallel these particular Calvinists with atheists. Both are very angry and arrogant. Both also seem to deny the love of God to an extent. Both seem to focus on being right instead of having priorities right.

 

[Angela53510]

Angela - with all due respect and with the fact that I love you, I would have to say it was Abigail who started the snarky comments and remarks.

She took a jibe at the user's name and posted that she couldn't take the OP seriously. Yet she constantly keeps coming back to post more snide comments and remarks on the OP's character.

Quite a vituperative method of aggression.

Also, I don't think that just because a person has been a long time member of the forums, they require special deference from other users.
Credibility on the internet is a personal choice.

Well, no credibility points for this OP yet! Which is to say, if we knew him, and he posted this thread, we might assume he is having an off day! But to be here not even a week, and post like this, no credibility at all for him!

With regards to the first shot it was the title of this thread, the second was the mocking of the name of Spurgeon with a screen name mocking Charles Spurgeon. Well, I guess technically, the screen name came first, since he had to join before he made the post. But for me, I saw the totally out of line thread name first.

If Abby had not called him on his name, I certainly would have. Not "sniping" at all! Calling him on mocking, and in connection with the third thing which was an OP devoid of Bibical or even historical content. You know that is true when even several Arminians chastise the OP and/or try to have a logical conversation about this age old debate. (Like anyone is going to change their opinion after 100 pages, or however long this thread goes!)

I'm kind of surprised at you, Rachel! That you would defend such an inflammatory thread! But I see by your "likes" you must be Arminian. That is ok, with me. I do hope we can still be friends. I promise I won't try and convert you. But I will stand up against a thread which was created solely to bash a great many members of the body of Christ! Especially one which does not have a clue as to the actual truths espoused by Calvin and his followers. I will say, the books I have read by Reformed scholars are extremely Biblical, esp. when compared to every post by this OP, who at this point has not used a single verse of Scripture.

But more later, it's getting late here now, and tomorrow so many more Christmas things to do! And I care for you, too Rachel!

 

[StanJ]

Well, no credibility points for this OP yet! Which is to say, if we knew him, and he posted this thread, we might assume he is having an off day! But to be here not even a week, and post like this, no credibility at all for him!

With regards to the first shot it was the title of this thread, the second was the mocking of the name of Spurgeon with a screen name mocking Charles Spurgeon. Well, I guess technically, the screen name came first, since he had to join before he made the post. But for me, I saw the totally out of line thread name first.

If Abby had not called him on his name, I certainly would have. Not "sniping" at all! Calling him on mocking, and in connection with the third thing which was an OP devoid of Bibical or even historical content. You know that is true when even several Arminians chastise the OP and/or try to have a logical conversation about this age old debate. (Like anyone is going to change their opinion after 100 pages, or however long this thread goes!)

I'm kind of surprised at you, Rachel! That you would defend such an inflammatory thread! But I see by your "likes" you must be Arminian. That is ok, with me. I do hope we can still be friends. I promise I won't try and convert you. But I will stand up against a thread which was created solely to bash a great many members of the body of Christ! Especially one which does not have a clue as to the actual truths espoused by Calvin and his followers. I will say, the books I have read by Reformed scholars are extremely Biblical, esp. when compared to every post by this OP, who at this point has not used a single verse of Scripture.

But more later, it's getting late here now, and tomorrow so many more Christmas things to do! And I care for you, too Rachel!

Credibility is in the eyes of a person who is objective, not somebody who is biased. This attitude seems to be common amongst your little clique here on this forum, that you think somebody coming in recently has no credibility even though they might know 10 times as much as you do. You pulled the same thing with me but I guess you're not used to people who stand up for the actual truth and to you . Truth is always objective of false teaching never is. I'll take you on anytime on any single petal of the Tulip Doctrine.
The fact is that Jean Cauvin was a hack humanist lawyer and because he couldn't cut it there he turned his attention to the Catholic Church that he grew up in. His understanding of the Bible was a very humanist one and as such he looked for a way to take humanism out of the equation which is why he came up with one of his tenants of sovereign election. What you fail to understand is that mankind is part of the equation and as such has to be part of the answer. As far as I'm concerned you have no right whatsoever to complain about people that take personal shots at anybody seeing as though from my perspective you're the one that instigates a lot of personal shots along with your little clique. Try dealing with the topic of the individual posts instead of coming in with personal attacks on people's abilities and the newness of their appearance here. I'm sure the owners of this site don't like that type of vitriolic behavior.

 

[seed_time_harvest]

No. If we had no choice, then we could not be condemned for what we've done. We had choice, but choice was related to our nature and our sin was sin nature. So we chose to sin, because it never dawned on us to make the good choice.

It's like a starving lion in a wheat field. Like domesticated cats, lions are omnivores. But they don't choose to eat wheat because it never dawns then to eat it. AND like what happens to domestic cats fed on nothing but meat, they die younger because of that. Wheat would stop a lion from starving, but it never thinks to do that because it's set in its nature. So is Man in sin nature. We can. We won't. And we won't because we hate God and love our sin.

God carries it out. Not us.

So I think you are saying that a man CAN come to CHRIST but he won't come to CHRIST because of his carnal nature.

So then someone might ask,how would a person get saved,If they never have a desire to even think about getting saved?

Doesn't nature Itself declare that there Is a GOD?

True GOD does the work,we are HIS workmanship created In CHRIST JESUS unto good works which were before ordained that we should walk In them and Its true that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of GOD but John 3:16 still says whosoever will believe In HIM shall have Everlasting Life.

That sound like choice.

 

[Rachel20]

Well, no credibility points for this OP yet! Which is to say, if we knew him, and he posted this thread, we might assume he is having an off day! But to be here not even a week, and post like this, no credibility at all for him!

With regards to the first shot it was the title of this thread, the second was the mocking of the name of Spurgeon with a screen name mocking Charles Spurgeon. Well, I guess technically, the screen name came first, since he had to join before he made the post. But for me, I saw the totally out of line thread name first.

If Abby had not called him on his name, I certainly would have. Not "sniping" at all! Calling him on mocking, and in connection with the third thing which was an OP devoid of Bibical or even historical content. You know that is true when even several Arminians chastise the OP and/or try to have a logical conversation about this age old debate. (Like anyone is going to change their opinion after 100 pages, or however long this thread goes!)

I'm kind of surprised at you, Rachel! That you would defend such an inflammatory thread! But I see by your "likes" you must be Arminian. That is ok, with me. I do hope we can still be friends. I promise I won't try and convert you. But I will stand up against a thread which was created solely to bash a great many members of the body of Christ! Especially one which does not have a clue as to the actual truths espoused by Calvin and his followers. I will say, the books I have read by Reformed scholars are extremely Biblical, esp. when compared to every post by this OP, who at this point has not used a single verse of Scripture.

But more later, it's getting late here now, and tomorrow so many more Christmas things to do! And I care for you, too Rachel!

Angela, I am not Arminian.

(Also, I am assuming the OP is female, because of the pink username.)

I would clarify that I am not defending the thread or am against Calvinists- but I stand by my post in this thread stating that Abigail Zeke was the one who started out a sharp conversation with the OP for which you felt the need to defend her.

I too hope we can be friends - but I do not see eye to eye with you on your response in which you believe you have to defend her and assert her credibility.

It is an appeal to authority and I don't think that is applicable in this instance (as much as it is a fallacy).

God bless you and I hope you have a wonderful Christmas !

PS - love you dearly

 

[seed_time_harvest]

Are you even aware that is one sentence right smack in the middle of a long explanation by Christ? What he says next shows where you missed something. What he says before that does too.

Yes,I think I know by those versus what you are saying,that man was so carnal that he had no desire to make the right choice and that GOD does all the work.

And I think you are saying that man only has a knowledge of his senses,...see,hear,taste,touch and feel.

I know faith comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD of GOD.

It might be beyond me to explain how faith comes to someone If they can't hear,taste...ect..I'm thinking they would need to be healed first.IDK

 

[StanJ]

Yes,I think I know by those versus what you are saying,that man was so carnal that he had no desire to make the right choice and that GOD does all the work.

And I think you are saying that man only has a knowledge of his senses,...see,hear,taste,touch and feel.

I know faith comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD of GOD.

It might be beyond me to explain how faith comes to someone If they can't hear,taste...ect..I'm thinking they would need to be healed first.IDK

If Paul teaches in Romans 1 that unbelievers can know God by his creation and therefore come to know him in a salvic way, then there is no doubt that others can do the same thing. We are told to seek knock and find and we can't very well do that if we don't have the ability to do it so it would be duplicitous of God and Jesus to tell us to do something we can't do. There was never a time in my life that I didn't know there was a God but there were definitely many years of my life when I ignored him and didn't follow him.

 

[seed_time_harvest]

If Paul teaches in Romans 1 that unbelievers can know God by his creation and therefore come to know him in a salvic way, then there is no doubt that others can do the same thing. We are told to seek knock and find and we can't very well do that if we don't have the ability to do it so it would be duplicitous of God and Jesus to tell us to do something we can't do. There was never a time in my life that I didn't know there was a God but there were definitely many years of my life when I ignored him and didn't follow him.

I agree with you but I understand why depleted believes In Calvinism,I just don't know what to tell her to make a good case against Calvinism.

 

[nowyouseem033]

Calvinism - You wont ever ever come to Christ unless first God opens your blind eyes to the see the beauty of the gospel... therefore it is God who must initiate salvation in you and God ALONE... To suggest he needs your permission or cooperation hinders the reign of Gods sovereignty and essentially puts man as having the final say on these important salvific matters. If salvation is orchestrated by God and executed by Christ then why wouldn't it be applicable through the spirit to everyone whom it was intended before eternity began. If God had a specific purpose in mind why cant he have a specific people in mind as well? and why is it wrong for God only to intentionally save those people and those poeple only through his efficacious grace whilst at the same time passing over the rest and leaving them to there just consequence? Interesting thread though i must say...

 

[trofimus]

Following the verse in the quote... yet all who were called... were not chosen. If God has decided that his calling would be irresistible then all who are called would be chosen... but...

Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

The truth is his call does not seem irresistible here. God in his sovereignty may have decided that his calling BE resistible.

I am not sure what you mean by "resistible vs irresistible".

The verse in Romans just says that whoever is predestined by God, he will also be called and then saved.

 

[nowyouseem033]

Which picture is more biblical of God saving: The man drowning in the ocean and calling out to God for help and God then throwing him a life jacket. Then its on him to make the decision to grab a hold of that life jacket and be rescued? OR The man dead at the bottom of the ocean who cannot do anything to save himself except that God throw himself in the depths of the ocean to save you and breathe life into again until you are alive? Ill let you decide?

 

[Spurgeoncy]

Matthew 24 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.


Kletos (called) and Ekkletos (chosen) -


The servants are the Church
The Jews are the Chosen
The nations are the called

Kletos means invited, ekkletos means selected.

The called ALL come to the feast

10 [FONT=&quot]So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]So all Jesus is saying is that the chosen people (the Jews) are few and the Nations are many
[/FONT]

 

[posthuman]

but John 3:16 still says whosoever will believe In HIM shall have Everlasting Life.

That sound like choice.

& John 3:16-17 is still in the middle of a conversation. with Nicodemus, who came to Christ, and was told that he had to be reborn before he could see the kingdom at all.

a man who thought he chose to go see a great teacher sent from God, curious to know what actions he should take, what he could 'do' ((how am i supposed to crawl back up into the womb?)) - but found out that the wind had chosen to blow him to the Christ, that something first had to be 'done' to him ((it blows where it listeth)), and then what was required of him was to believe.

Nicodemus believed - that Jesus was a teacher sent from God. that's all flesh and blood revealed to him. Jesus this and told him He needed to be remade before he could even see what it is he needed to believe. Nicodemus needed eyes that could see -

- where does a person get such eyes?

 

[laura_charlotte]

In agreement.

Credibility is in the eyes of a person who is objective, not somebody who is biased. This attitude seems to be common amongst your little clique here on this forum, that you think somebody coming in recently has no credibility even though they might know 10 times as much as you do. You pulled the same thing with me but I guess you're not used to people who stand up for the actual truth and to you . Truth is always objective of false teaching never is. I'll take you on anytime on any single petal of the Tulip Doctrine.
The fact is that Jean Cauvin was a hack humanist lawyer and because he couldn't cut it there he turned his attention to the Catholic Church that he grew up in. His understanding of the Bible was a very humanist one and as such he looked for a way to take humanism out of the equation which is why he came up with one of his tenants of sovereign election. What you fail to understand is that mankind is part of the equation and as such has to be part of the answer. As far as I'm concerned you have no right whatsoever to complain about people that take personal shots at anybody seeing as though from my perspective you're the one that instigates a lot of personal shots along with your little clique. Try dealing with the topic of the individual posts instead of coming in with personal attacks on people's abilities and the newness of their appearance here. I'm sure the owners of this site don't like that type of vitriolic behavior.

 

[posthuman]

His winnowing fork is in His hand, and the Spirit is upon Him

The hearing ear and the seeing eye -
- the LORD made them both.
(Proverbs 20:12)​

what i see in John 3 is the birth of Nicodemus. Nicodemus being threshed, Christ separating the chaff in him from the wheat. this is done by throwing the grain into the air, and the wind carries away the chaff, 'where it wills' - without wind, the chaff falls right back down into the pile of wheat, and without the chaff being separated, the wheat can't enter the grinder.
& how did the wheat get there in the first place? God gives the increase.