Calvinism - Total Depravity

[StanJ]

Since you are choosing to be obtuse, I will quote the entire entry:

1. a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.

2. a misleading or unsound argument.

3. deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness.

4. Logic. any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound.

5. Obsolete. deception.

Once again, I introduced the term to the discussion, using it in the fourth sense. You don't get to switch to another sense and then claim that I'm incorrect. That is invalid and disingenuous, and you are the one being equivocal.

What you did is use it in the wrong sense and now you're trying to backtrack. Obviously you're not capable of having a genuine conversation or discussion. I come across your ilk all the time on Christian forums.

Once again, agreeing with one thing which someone once taught does not make one a follower of that person. Your reasoning is flawed.

Repeating yourself doesn't make it any truer but I will reiterate and address your statement again that accepting what someone teaches that is false teaching makes you a follower of that person. Instead you should be a follower of Jesus and what the written word says.

Actually, you haven't. And I haven't deflected. Please follow the thread carefully, don't exaggerate, and don't make unfounded accusations.

It's all in black and white.

"There is none that seek Him"... is not needing much in the way of exegesis. It means NONE SEEK HIM. That is the essence of total depravity, as used in the teachings of Calvinism.

What you are doing is called eisegesis... you're interpolating scripture to suit your doctrinal position. You don't understand the scripture you're quoting and pulling it totally out of context while disregarding what Jesus does says in verses such as Matthew 7:7-8. If we really had no ability to do so then Jesus wouldn't ask us to do it now would he?

For the record, I am not a Calvinist, nor do I hold to any particular teachings of Calvinism. However, I am capable of understanding an argument even if I don't hold it, and explaining it to people who clearly don't.

It's very hard to keep track of all of you who claim not to be calvinist but are arguing for the position. There is some real denial going on around here, or just a lot of people who like to be contrary and have nothing better to do. If you don't want to argue with me then please do me a favor and don't because you're not going to win, you just going to look foolish.

 

[Angela53510]

you said,



View attachment 163873

I would imagine Stan doesn't understand graphs anymore than he understood Dino's use of the word "fallacy," or me trying to explain how his "magical or black and white thinking" shows a lack of maturity in his posts!

 

[StanJ]

This is is totally untrue. In Seminary, when we discussed Reformed Theology, our professor, NOT a Calvinist, had us rate where we stood with regards to TULIP. We ranged from 1 point, through 2 1/2 (me at that time, and several others,) through to a 5 point Reformed pastor, who attended our seminary. We also had other students who were Reformed Baptist, and of course Arminians. All viewpoints were valid, providing we were able to back it with Scripture.

Exactly what Seminary did you go to? All seminaries that I know of always relate/subscribe to a statement of faith either for or against Calvinism. The only exception I can think of would be a liberal Seminary and don't get me going on those. Jesus makes it very clear in his word you're either for him or against him and there is no such thing as viewpoints. Truth is black and white and only Satan, the Father of Lies, lives in the grey areas.

Your rigid, black and white thinking, above, also known as "magical thinking" is not a good sign! In fact, in is indicative of childhood trauma!
"Black and white thinking and other cognitive distortions:
• Child-like, concrete, and magical thinking
• What they think is normal and real does not coincide with "real life"
• Derive "life rules" and “automatic thoughts” from childhood distortions
• Cling to the distortions despite challenge or contrary evidence
• Provoke a non-existent reality into being in order to verify a distortion
• Collect evidence to support the distortion while ignoring evidence to the contrary
• Patterns of distorted thinking (such as generalizations, all or nothing, discounting,
jumping to conclusions, assuming, labeling, and emotional reasoning)"
http://www.traumarecoveryassociates.com/signs-of-unresolved-trauma.html
That list pretty much sums up what I have seen in your posts since joining CC. You might want to get some help. I'm sure you could benefit, if you received counselling.

This is exactly the type of ammunition that atheists use to show Christians why they shouldn't believe in God and to accuse all Christians of having that cognitive dissonance when in actuality very few Christians have that cognitive dissonance. Basically you've gone over to the dark side by using psychological mumbo-jumbo to try to prove a point that you can't on the Christian side. You must really have some huge problems yourself with cognitive dissonance if you resort to this type of tactic

As for these ridiculous statements, to say nothing of your complete lack of understanding of Reformed Theology, you might want to read the book, "What is Reformed Theology? Understanding the Basics" by RC Sproule. I don't think you will agree with everything, but it might be an eye opener how many things you thought Calvinism was, that are actually not true at all! I know it did for me!

I've already told you I don't agree with RC Sproul and your type of condescending approach doesn't really lend a whole lot of credibility to your arguments when all you do is deny but never a firm or corroborate any of your points of view. same here keep on telling me I don't know anything about Calvinism yet they can't refute my arguments nor show me scripture that supports it, just as you're doing here. If you're so sure about total depravity and support it with scripture and prove the assertion.

 

[StanJ]

I would imagine Stan doesn't understand graphs anymore than he understood Dino's use of the word "fallacy," or me trying to explain how his "magical or black and white thinking" shows a lack of maturity in his posts!

Then I can only surmise you understand absolutely nothing about everything you talk about. Every time you come into a thread Angela all you do is take it down to its lowest base denominator. If you're the typical product that comes out of seminaries and I hope to God there's not a whole lot of women going to the seminaries because they come out bitter and cynical.

 

[PeterJens]

If I walk into a room of chairs, furniture, swords, big drops, things that can crush
and destroy me, yet it is all dark, to me the room is empty.

Jesus brings light into the world and demonstrates that which destroys and
that which builds up.

Absolutes always suffer from exceptions, and calvanism though appealing, suffers
from this floor. Its power is to link concepts together and give a whole position
to which people can affirm or deny. It is often used to create the sense of belonging
to a group and identifying the opposition.

My basic opposition to Total depravity is being a sheep. We are born the elect,
those who will be called, forgiven, washed clean and walking into eternity. We do not
know it, yet when we hear His call, our hearts will warm and we will follow.

And the rub is we respond while others do not, we rise up and are filled while others
lay passive not knowing why. This is what we see and know yet how do we express this,
other than walking in the way of Christ and love.

 

[Tintin]

Then I can only surmise you understand absolutely nothing about everything you talk about. Every time you come into a thread Angela all you do is take it down to its lowest base denominator. If you're the typical product that comes out of seminaries and I hope to God there's not a whole lot of women going to the seminaries because they come out bitter and cynical.

Wow. You're pig-headed. Angela is a great woman of God. It says a lot about your posts that Laura agrees with you.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Wow. You're pig-headed. Angela is a great woman of God. It says a lot about your posts that Laura agrees with you.

I am surprised people are still responding to him at all.

 

[Grandpa]

If I walk into a room of chairs, furniture, swords, big drops, things that can crush
and destroy me, yet it is all dark, to me the room is empty.

Jesus brings light into the world and demonstrates that which destroys and
that which builds up.

Absolutes always suffer from exceptions, and calvanism though appealing, suffers
from this floor. Its power is to link concepts together and give a whole position
to which people can affirm or deny. It is often used to create the sense of belonging
to a group and identifying the opposition.

My basic opposition to Total depravity is being a sheep. We are born the elect,
those who will be called, forgiven, washed clean and walking into eternity. We do not
know it, yet when we hear His call, our hearts will warm and we will follow.

And the rub is we respond while others do not, we rise up and are filled while others
lay passive not knowing why. This is what we see and know yet how do we express this,
other than walking in the way of Christ and love.

Looking back to yourself before Christ would you say you were a good person? Or would you say you didn't really have the capability, although you did nice things from time to time.

After coming to Christ would you say that you fundamentally changed? From a person that wasn't capable of doing good to a person who is very sensitive to doing what is right?


Can someone say they weren't good before coming to Christ but that doesn't mean they were depraved? If depraved means wicked or sinful then I don't see how someone could try and claim that they weren't depraved before coming to Christ. And if they try to say they weren't totally depraved then I would just say they haven't been shown what they were. Or they refused to look...

 

[posthuman]

As I said, graphs don't mean anything because they don't represent a truth. They are concocted by people that try to sell the point and I don't buy what you're trying to sell. If you accept any part of the Tulip Doctrine then you're a calvinist and you're accepting false teaching.
If you don't want to admit that then that's your choice but it doesn't change my mind one iota, nor the truth.

i really think you don't understand how to read the venn diagram i made.

maybe if i put it in a more complex and cumbersome way:

---

---

let

{S} = the set of all theological understandings​

and let

{C} = all theological understanding contained in reformed theology
{O} = all theological understanding contained in all other theologies
{T} = the truth, true theology, perfect theological understanding​

obviously,

{C, O, T} ⊆ S​

that is,

∀x, {(x ∈ C) or (x ∈ O) or (x ∈ T) → x ∈ S}​

but this doesn't mean S = (C ∪ O ∪ T), that would be overcounting.

rather,

S = (C ∪ O ∪ T) - (C ∩ O) - (C ∩ T) - (O ∩ T) + (C ∩ O ∩ T)​

that statement is exactly what the diagram shows, and assigns no value to any of the intersections or unions. any one of them could be ∅.

---

---

your statement is that

(C ∩ O) = (C ∩ T) = (C ∩ O ∩ T) = ∅​

but you haven't proven that any of these equivocations are true.

---

---

 

[posthuman]

all you do is take it down to its lowest base denominator.

which is wise, actually -- if you divide by anything other than the LCD you end up with a bunch of fractions.

 

[Angela53510]

i really think you don't understand how to read the venn diagram i made.

maybe if i put it in a more complex and cumbersome way:

---

---

let

{S} = the set of all theological understandings​

and let

{C} = all theological understanding contained in reformed theology
{O} = all theological understanding contained in all other theologies
{T} = the truth, true theology, perfect theological understanding​

obviously,

{C, O, T} ⊆ S​

that is,

∀x, {(x ∈ C) or (x ∈ O) or (x ∈ T) → x ∈ S}​

but this doesn't mean S = (C ∪ O ∪ T), that would be overcounting.

rather,

S = (C ∪ O ∪ T) - (C ∩ O) - (C ∩ T) - (O ∩ T) + (C ∩ O ∩ T)​

that statement is exactly what the diagram shows, and assigns no value to any of the intersections or unions. any one of them could be ∅.

---

---

your statement is that

(C ∩ O) = (C ∩ T) = (C ∩ O ∩ T) = ∅​

but you haven't proven that any of these equivocations are true.

---

---

You crack me up, PH! You got me at the upside alpha! Or is it just an ordinary A?

But, that being said,, I did get that in the end, you have nullified his proposition! I love the way you dig so deeply into math and logic.

I will take the grade 8 Venn diagram, I guess supplemented by these propositions or equations or whatever they are called!

 

[Angela53510]

Exactly what Seminary did you go to? All seminaries that I know of always relate/subscribe to a statement of faith either for or against Calvinism. The only exception I can think of would be a liberal Seminary and don't get me going on those. Jesus makes it very clear in his word you're either for him or against him and there is no such thing as viewpoints. Truth is black and white and only Satan, the Father of Lies, lives in the grey areas.

This is exactly the type of ammunition that atheists use to show Christians why they shouldn't believe in God and to accuse all Christians of having that cognitive dissonance when in actuality very few Christians have that cognitive dissonance. Basically you've gone over to the dark side by using psychological mumbo-jumbo to try to prove a point that you can't on the Christian side. You must really have some huge problems yourself with cognitive dissonance if you resort to this type of tactic

I've already told you I don't agree with RC Sproul and your type of condescending approach doesn't really lend a whole lot of credibility to your arguments when all you do is deny but never a firm or corroborate any of your points of view. same here keep on telling me I don't know anything about Calvinism yet they can't refute my arguments nor show me scripture that supports it, just as you're doing here. If you're so sure about total depravity and support it with scripture and prove the assertion.

I went to a Southern Baptist seminary. We didn't have to sign any kind statement of faith. Our seminary's goal was to make thinking students, with the tools to exegete the Word correctly, and tools for pastoral or other Christian ministry. We had students from a broad range of denominations, with a large range of beliefs on a variety of theological topics. We had Anglicans, Charismatics, Mennonites, Reformed, Baptists of all shapes and colours, Lutherans and non-denoms. The school has a sterling reputation among all Conservative Christians in the area, and the open classes, or intensives brought in a huge cross range of people from the community. Not Liberal in the slightest! I wasn't even allowed to preach in churches, for preaching class, like the men. Another reason I moved to a different Baptist convention, where I am allowed to preach. And in fact, welcomed and loved for it!

There is even a Reformed branch in the SB convention in Canada for churches to join but they may have to agree to a Statement of Faith.

Which comes down to the fact, that if you are a conservative Christian, learn to support your views with the Bible, and secondary, do read from a wide range of authors on the different topics. And reject what is wrong, and accept what is right. I did go into seminary a scared Arminian, who had never been exposed to any other viewpoint, and came out believing in eternal security. But more because of what I read in the Bible, as I studied it in a whole new way!

You see, the problem with your POV, is that you have set yourself up as God, and the final arbitrator in all matters theological. Because only your way is correct, that means everyone else is under the control of Satan.

As far as comparing me to an atheist, for my point of view, well, I'm going to let the real God be my judge! And continue to love serve and worship Christ with all my heart. And praise him in everything!

So have your read Sproule then? If so, then I'm sorry your heart is so hard, and so fixed on your own theories, that you cannot allow God to move you forward in your Christian walk. Because once you know everything, it is kind of game over, wouldn't you say?

I do agree I need to put up some scriptures, although Total Depravity is the only way to read the Bible. In short, we are all sinners. Do you agree with that? And if we are all sinners, we are separate from God, right? Therefore, we are all in need of a Saviour, right? Because we are totally lost without Christ? How could we be anything but totally depraved? Oh right, that even atheists can do good things! And if they do, it is because they are either following a shadow of what they have heard about Christ, or the motives are ulterior. Like the people who give food to the begging Buddhist monks, in the hope they will gain brownie points to go to a better place, next incarnation. Or perhaps God is moving in their hearts and lives!

Yes, I know there are other aspects, and right now, I have to leave to go visit my son, who lives in Hong Kong, but had to come to a nearby city for business purposes. I will post something later, if this thread is still going, from the Bible, ok?


PS. I do not consider myself a Calvinist, although the older I get, the more I read the Bible, the more I lean to Reformed theology. (Oh, and I really don't need to defend myself, you know!)

 

[Depleted]

i really think you don't understand how to read the venn diagram i made.

maybe if i put it in a more complex and cumbersome way:

---

---

let

{S} = the set of all theological understandings​

and let

{C} = all theological understanding contained in reformed theology
{O} = all theological understanding contained in all other theologies
{T} = the truth, true theology, perfect theological understanding​

obviously,

{C, O, T} ⊆ S​

that is,

∀x, {(x ∈ C) or (x ∈ O) or (x ∈ T) → x ∈ S}​

but this doesn't mean S = (C ∪ O ∪ T), that would be overcounting.

rather,

S = (C ∪ O ∪ T) - (C ∩ O) - (C ∩ T) - (O ∩ T) + (C ∩ O ∩ T)​

that statement is exactly what the diagram shows, and assigns no value to any of the intersections or unions. any one of them could be ∅.

---

---

your statement is that

(C ∩ O) = (C ∩ T) = (C ∩ O ∩ T) = ∅​

but you haven't proven that any of these equivocations are true.

---

---

::::::eyes gloss over:::::

Ummm, no. The diagram made sense. This? Is it even English?

 

[stonesoffire]

I would ask you Stan, what is the good that you would present to God that has any redeeming qualitites?

 

[notmyown]

::::::eyes gloss over:::::

Ummm, no. The diagram made sense. This? Is it even English?

it isn't.

because i said so.

 

[posthuman]

which is wise, actually -- if you divide by anything other than the LCD you end up with a bunch of fractions.

View attachment 163883

a little reflection shows this isn't entirely true.

you can divide by any common denominator and avoid fractions, but dividing by anything other than a common denominator will leave fractional results.

however by the well-ordering-property there is a least common divisor, and it's not hard to show also that this must be a prime number.

so what's foolish about finding a basis that can't be decomposed into primes, because it is already prime?

you tell me, Stan.

 

[Cee]

He has drawn all to Him:

John 12:31Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. 32And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

Where I diverge with Calvinistic thought is irresistible grace. I believe all are drawn to Him, but not all choose Him. Even though it is His desire that all be saved.

1 Tim 2:4 Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Salvation is available to all men:

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men.

Acts 17:30 Although God overlooked the ignorance of earlier times, He now commands all men everywhere to repent.

All need to repent and turn to the Lord to be saved:

Acts 3:19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord,

But how can they turn to the Lord, if they don't know who He is?

Romans 10:14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!

So to conclude:

1. Jesus has drawn all men to Himself.
2. God desires all men to be saved.
3. But not all are.
4. Because they need to know Him.
5. And they need to "hear" Him to know Him.

John 17:3 And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.


C.

 

[StanJ]

Wow. You're pig-headed. Angela is a great woman of God. It says a lot about your posts that Laura agrees with you.

I guess it's not surprising that Angela will have followers on this issue and it's also not surprising that one of her followers would denigrate another member just to try to make a point. Seems Calvinists can't resist the derogatory tactics rather than just debate the issues. Quite sad and somewhat pathetic IMHO.

 

[Spurgeoncy]

Total Depravity is the only way to read the Bible. In short, we are all sinners. Do you agree with that? And if we are all sinners, we are separate from God, right? Therefore, we are all in need of a Saviour, right? Because we are totally lost without Christ? How could we be anything but totally depraved? Oh right, that even atheists can do good things! And if they do, it is because they are either following a shadow of what they have heard about Christ, or the motives are ulterior. Like the people who give food to the begging Buddhist monks, in the hope they will gain brownie points to go to a better place, next incarnation. Or perhaps God is moving in their hearts and lives!

This is nonsense on many levels though.

Firstly you start with a usage of the word depravity that is so egregious it smacks of being cultic.

This specious use of language actually occurs because you are pulling a magic trick; while we get distracted with the linguistic left hand, the right hand of false logic goes to work.

So really what you are peddling is a doctrine of total sinfulness. But this is just cack, rubbish, twaddle.

You can go into many non-Christian cultures and you will find that children honour their mother and father. They therefore are partially obeying God's Law. They are therefore not "totally sinful" as you so disingenuously would put it, were you to use honest language. And the further examples are endless.

 

[StanJ]

This is nonsense on many levels though.

Firstly you start with a usage of the word depravity that is so egregious it smacks of being cultic.

This specious use of language actually occurs because you are pulling a magic trick; while we get distracted with the linguistic left hand, the right hand of false logic goes to work.

So really what you are peddling is a doctrine of total sinfulness. But this is just cack, rubbish, twaddle.

You can go into many non-Christian cultures and you will find that children honour their mother and father. They therefore are partially obeying God's Law. They are therefore not "totally sinful" as you so disingenuously would put it, were you to use honest language. And the further examples are endless.

This is sop with most Calvinists. They insert their doctrine of vernacular into scripture and expect you to accept it but anybody who can read the scripture knows that the scripture does it say that we are totally depraved are there we have no ability to do good. The world is full of people who do good but are not Christians. Philippians 4:8 does not say anything about these things having to be Christian or of God. They are in and of themselves good.