Calvinist error of pitting God's Sovereignty against God's Love.

[trust_in_the_name]

If God wills that all men be saved eternally, which he doesn't,

Sure He does.

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:3-4)

As it says, He desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

He is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

He would save them.

According to your understanding, perhaps, He would (Proverbs 3:5).

5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; (Proverbs 3:5)

Nonetheless, your understanding is insufficient, because His ways are not our ways, nor are His thoughts our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9): His judgments are unsearchable and His ways are past finding out (Romans 11:33).

8 "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," says the Lord. 9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8-9)

33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! (Romans 11:33)

So, although He longs for everyone to be saved, He still chooses not to save them, according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will (Ephesians 1:11), that His purpose according to election might stand (Romans 9:11).

Dan 4:35, And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and he "doeth according to his will" in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth' and none can stay his hand, or say uwnto him, What doest thou?

35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, "What have You done?" (Daniel 4:35)

Although He is not willing that any should perish, He also wills that many (Matthew 7:13-14) should perish, and this latter will supercedes the former. We know this because, although He wills both, He chooses to cause only the latter. Therefore, He does according to His will among the inhabitants of the earth (Daniel 4:35).

Isa 50:2, Is my hand shortened at all, that it cannot redeem? or have I no power to deliver?

2 Why, when I came, was there no man? Why, when I called, was there none to answer? Is My hand shortened at all that it cannot redeem? Or have I no power to deliver? Indeed with My rebuke I dry up the sea, I make the rivers a wilderness; Their fish stink because there is no water, And die of thirst. (Isaiah 50:2)

He can redeem, and has power to deliver; He simply chooses not to. See above.

Mark 16:16, Pay particular attention as to what salvation he is talking about, it is not eternal salvation, but baptism saves (delivers) us from a guilty conscience, 1 Pet 3:21.

 

[trust_in_the_name]

John 3:16 is not refering to the world of all mankind, but to the world of belivers only.

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For God so loved the elect? No, "for God so loved the world" (John 3:16).

According to 1 John 2:2, what you said is false.

Correct.

2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (1 John 2:2)

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For God so loved the elect? No, "for God so loved the world" (John 3:16).



Correct.

2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (1 John 2:2)

Dear trustinthename: Amen! You and I are in agreement on these matters. What I should not have said was that St. Peter is a false teacher. He was not false in all things. Anyway, not all false teachers are false in all things. Even John Calvin and Martin Luther, and the popes of Rome since 1014 AD, taught some true things. They were not wholly false teachers. But on this one point, for just a brief while, St. Peter did not understand something. St. Paul corrected his misunderstanding, gently, and with love and truth.
He held circumcision was required of Jewish converts to Christianity. Or something like that. St. Paul said in Galatians by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. Circumcision is one of the works of the Old OT Law.
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS But of course, St. Peter was deified, he was at the Mount of Transfiguration and saw Christ in all His Divinity, so he knew theology better than other people. Of course, being only human still, he made a brief mistake about the ceremonial law of the OT. St. Paul was taught by God to correct St. Peter on this matter. Well, anyway. Dear Saint Peter, forgive me for saying you were a false teacher. You were not. God forgave you any mistake you did make. May God forgive us all for all our sins, mistakes, transgressions. May God deliver us from the evil one, from all evil. Lord have mercy on us all. Amen.

 

[tribesman]

FYI, Fred PHelps is a Calvinist.

Well, yes he is. But it is confusing as to what kind of calvinism he promotes. His stance has changed a little now and then, as far as I can tell. He used to call himself a "primitive baptist" and an "old school baptist", and traces of hyper-calvinism would be found in his belief in equal ultimacy. But he is also a admirer of Jonathan Edwards! As of late he has been putting up creeds on his website, inclusive of WCF, which would pretty much be a sign of symphaties for what is seen as orthodox calvinism. So, this would definitely be a mixed bag.

 

[Zilla64007]

doesn't matter what kind of Calvinist he is, tribesman... Calvinism is Calvinism, no matter how you slice it.

 

[trust_in_the_name]

Regardless of his stance on soteriology, the issues that most people have with Fred Phelps and his church have little to do with Calvinism vs. Arminianism, and in fact if anyone were interested I could point out various false teachings he promotes which any biblical Calvinist, Arminian, or anything in between would agree identify him as a false teacher (and in fact I did so in another thread but the information is still available).

 

[tribesman]

Regardless of his stance on soteriology, the issues that most people have with Fred Phelps and his church have little to do with Calvinism vs. Arminianism, and in fact if anyone were interested I could point out various false teachings he promotes which any biblical Calvinist, Arminian, or anything in between would agree identify him as a false teacher (and in fact I did so in another thread but the information is still available).

You might put up a link here to that post where you discuss Phelps.

 

[trust_in_the_name]

You might put up a link here to that post where you discuss Phelps.

Sure, the link is:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/35813-choosing-church-5.html

Here's a reposting of the text of my post:

Of course, the fact that a church calls itself a Christian church is not, in and of itself, a guarantee that it is one. As mentioned previously, its teachings also need to line up with the Bible. The only way to find out whether that is the case is to actually look at what the church teaches, either through its leaders or its members, in whatever form that information is available.

As an example, the Westboro Baptist Church has written,

"All Sodom citizens were not gays and lesbians. Most were not. But they were enablers! Sodomite society had reached a stage of decadence and debauchery whereby homosexuals were accepted with respect and dignity as merely innocent practitioners of a morally neuteral lifestyle."

(www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/feb2004/Monograph_2-14-2004.pdf)

Yet, if we compare this to what the Bible actually states quite clearly:

4 Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally." (Genesis 19:4-5)

we see that it says "both old and young, all the people from every quarter" wanted to "know them carnally." So it doesn't say that "[m]ost of them were not;" it says that all of them were!

Clearly, Fred Phelps is attempting to justify his church's unusual practices and beliefs, but he's doing so by disbelieving what the Bible says, and claiming it says something it doesn't. He's taken the truth out of the scripture, and replaced it with lies. This is one of the signs of a so-called Christian church which really isn't.

This is only a one example of their false teachings, but I can give more examples as well if anyone has an interest.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

doesn't matter what kind of Calvinist he is, tribesman... Calvinism is Calvinism, no matter how you slice it.

Amen. Calvinism is heresy, no matter how you slice it. That is why Norman L. Geisler's talk of moderate Calvinism in his book "Chosen But Free" is so misleading!
In Erie Scott R. Harrington