Calvinism more evangelistic?

[jbh28]

Yes. And it's yours.

Non cals can easily tell who isn't the elect. They're the ones who reject Christ. So choose this day whom you will serve. God has provided the way.

Really. So if a person rejects Christ today, they are non-elect? Couldn't they be saved a year from now even though they rejected Christ? How do you tell who isn't the elect while they are still living on earth?
t
The answer is no you cannot. Nobody knows who the elect are and who the non elect are.(yes, we know that a believer is elect) That's why we must tell all the gospel and let God do the rest. You can tell them that if they believe, they will be saved. No Calvinist would deny that. (ok...well except for hypers)

Then you've never met a Calvinist. Just read the posts on this board for a starter.

Do you purposefully misrepresent, or are just just continually mistaken. Calvinist already on here(meaning this thread) have said they don't believe that God has only chosen a "few." Do you believe God has chosen a "few"? I'm assuming you believe in election(conditional).

 

[Luke2427]

Then you've never met a Calvinist. Just read the posts on this board for a starter.

That's not true. I honestly think that the reason many are not already Calvinists is because they don't really know what Calvinism is. I know that was true for me. I think this statement is evidence that it is true for Amy.

Calvinists believe the Bible when it says that around the throne there will be a multitude which no man can number out of every kindred and tongue.

There will be a vast ocean of redeemed humanity forever glorifying the lamb for his infinite love and his indescribable grace displayed at Calvary.

But this is still called a "few" by the Lord Jesus.

 

[Luke2427]

You can thank the Sword of the Lord for that.

Bingo!!

Did you know that the Sword prints Spurgeon sermons but edits out all the Calvinistic content???

Is that not absolutely AMAZING?

I met a guy who was Free Will Baptist then Independent Baptist. He wanted his pastor to adv ise him on some good reading material. His pastor was not a Calvinist and did not know that Spurgeon was a Calvinist but loved to read his sermons in the Sword so he told the guy that he cannot go wrong with Spurgeon.

The guy, following his Arminian pastor's advice started reading Spurgeon and BECAME A CALVINIST!

:applause:

 

[Havensdad]

And he was correct. God is under no obligation to save us. But that is not the same thing as looking someone in the face and saying "God may not have chosen YOU". Try doing that sometime and see how your evangelism goes.

Um, I didn't read the whole board, but this is exactly what Spurgeon did. And I am betting his evangelistic efforts were more effective than yours...

However, I do not do this, most of the time, because Jesus didn't, nor did the apostles. Both Jesus and Paul taught this doctrine to believers. They did not proclaim it on the streets, simply because it is a doctrine only the regenerate can understand and appreciate.

 

[Winman]

Do you purposefully misrepresent, or are just just continually mistaken. Calvinist already on here(meaning this thread) have said they don't believe that God has only chosen a "few." Do you believe God has chosen a "few"? I'm assuming you believe in election(conditional).

This is absurd. Many Calvinists believe in Limited Atonement, that Jesus only died for some men and not all.

 

[TCGreek]

Ask either Spurgeon or Piper!

 

[jbh28]

This is absurd. Many Calvinists believe in Limited Atonement, that Jesus only died for some men and not all.

Did I say otherwise?

 

[John Toppass]

Um, I didn't read the whole board, but this is exactly what Spurgeon did. And I am betting his evangelistic efforts were more effective than yours...

However, I do not do this, most of the time, because Jesus didn't, nor did the apostles. Both Jesus and Paul taught this doctrine to believers. They did not proclaim it on the streets, simply because it is a doctrine only the regenerate can understand and appreciate.

AHHHH so your the one incharge of deciding who's works are greater than anothers. Good to know, but something tells me if you are doing what God is telling you to do then there is no one who's works are greater.

May I suggest, try following the Lord and not a famous person. There are blessings that you can not get any other way.

 

[Pareeeee]

I like the Free Presbyterians. Ian Paisely is probably my favorite living preacher.

Which Free Presbyterian Church did you attend?

Ian Paisley is awesome. Calling the Pope the Antichrist takes a LOT of guts. I met him in person years ago when he came to our former church to preach at a tent meeting. Northern Ireland was lucky to have such a good Christian man in their government for so many years.
I have many of his sermons downloaded from SERMONAUDIO.COM. What an awesome website!

urr I'm wary of stating online where exactly I'm from, (that's why I just generalize and say Ontario) not because I don't trust YOU in particular but any Tom, Dick or Harry on the internet could search these forums. I don't even say where I'm from on my Facebook, lol. I guess I'm paranoid - I don't trust inturwebz privacy I usually only tell ppl stuff like that through PM's or e-mail.

 

[Havensdad]

May I suggest, try following the Lord and not a famous person. There are blessings that you can not get any other way.

How disingenuous. The question addressed specifically why no Calvinists evangelized this way. I was giving an example of one. It is very dishonest of you to try and repaint my response, as if I was following a man.

I agree we should follow God, and His word, and not a man. So when the scriptures say that none can come, unless given by God, we should trust it, instead of following men (Arminius, Pelagius) and adding "free will" into texts that say nothing about it. When the scriptures say faith is "given" by God in exact measure, we should accept it, and follow it, instead of the doctrine of men who would try to change it into a "choice" or a "prayer."

 

[Luke2427]

Um, I didn't read the whole board, but this is exactly what Spurgeon did. And I am betting his evangelistic efforts were more effective than yours...

However, I do not do this, most of the time, because Jesus didn't, nor did the apostles. Both Jesus and Paul taught this doctrine to believers. They did not proclaim it on the streets, simply because it is a doctrine only the regenerate can understand and appreciate.

This is an excellent point.

 

[webdog]

It is a common assault by Arminians (and those who are Arminians but like to call themselves other things) that Calvinists are not evangelistic and that Calvinism dampens evangelistic fervor.

Pure intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Luke2427]

Pure intellectual dishonesty.

No it isn't and yet again certainly not just because you say so.

You do this often Webdog. You drive by post some silly accusation like this without proving it.

HOW is it intellectual dishonesty? If you are not going to prove it then it is nothing but a worthless, inflammatory drive by post.

 

[webdog]

Regarding election, do Calvinists believe God chooses whom he will save? Yes

Do non-Calvinists believe God chooses whom he will save?
Yes.

Do non-Calvinists believe that God knows who will exercise saving faith? Yes,
Do Calvinists believe that God knows who will exercise saving faith? Yes

Do Calvinists know who those people are? No.
Do non-Cals know who those people are? No

If Calvinists should tell people they may not be elect, shouldn't non-Calvinists do the same thing? Yes.

Another strawman argument bites the dust.

Not really since the scope and definition of "the elect" are not the same in both views.

 

[jbh28]

Not really since the scope and definition of "the elect" are not the same in both views.

Ok, what are the definitions then?

Calvinist definition of the elect. All those that are saved or will be saved.


any others?

 

[webdog]

No it isn't and yet again certainly not just because you say so.

You do this often Webdog. You drive by post some silly accusation like this without proving it.

HOW is it intellectual dishonesty? If you are not going to prove it then it is nothing but a worthless, inflammatory drive by post.

I have told you I am not an Arminian as defined. I don't believe God looks through the corridors of time to see who would be saved...I don't believe man can lose his salvation, yet you deliberately and blatantly dismiss it and still choose to call me an Arminian. That was not a drive by post, it was a reminder as this has not been the first time you have heard this from someone who refers to themselves as a "non cal".

Would you like me to refer to you as a Roman Catholic from now on since you share the belief of Augustinian original sin, the virgin birth and the Trinity...and then when you tell me you are not a Roman Catholic I then refer to you as a "Roman Catholic who likes to call himself other things"?

 

[webdog]

Ok, what are the definitions then?

Calvinist definition of the elect. All those that are saved or will be saved.


any others?

Well, there are three camps from what I know...maybe there are more. There is the understanding that the elect were chosen FOR salvation. There is the understanding that the elect are those who have believed. There is the understanding the elect are jewish believers, "true" Israel ("not all Israel is Israel")

 

[Luke2427]

I have told you I am not an Arminian as defined. I don't believe God looks through the corridors of time to see who would be saved...I don't believe man can lose his salvation, yet you deliberately and blatantly dismiss it and still choose to call me an Arminian. That was not a drive by post, it was a reminder as this has not been the first time you have heard this from someone who refers to themselves as a "non cal".

Would you like me to refer to you as a Roman Catholic from now on since you share the belief of Augustinian original sin, the virgin birth and the Trinity...and then when you tell me you are not a Roman Catholic I then refer to you as a "Roman Catholic who likes to call himself other things"?

We have talked about this and you tried to distinguish yourself form Arminism and failed except in one point- eternal security, which BTW Arminius may have believed as well.

You do not believe in Total Depravity- in fact you are actually left of Arminius here closer to Pelagius the only distinguishing factor being that you do believe that men are born with a sin nature. Arminius believed in Total Depravity basically like Calvinists.

You do not believe in unconditional election- how do you believe God elects?

You do not believe in Particular Redemption- you believe what Arminians believe about this.

You do not believe in Irresistable Grace-

You do believe in a form of Perseverance of the Saints.

That makes you about four fifths Arminian. It kind of just makes you an inconsistent Arminian.

 

[webdog]

We have talked about this and you tried to distinguish yourself form Arminism and failed except in one point- eternal security, which BTW Arminius may have believed as well.

You do not believe in Total Depravity- in fact you are actually left of Arminius here closer to Pelagius the only distinguishing factor being that you do believe that men are born with a sin nature. Arminius believed in Total Depravity basically like Calvinists.

You do not believe in unconditional election- how do you believe God elects?

You do not believe in Particular Redemption- you believe what Arminians believe about this.

You do not believe in Irresistable Grace-

You do believe in a form of Perseverance of the Saints.

That makes you about four fifths Arminian. It kind of just makes you an inconsistent Arminian.

You don't follow along to well my 1/5 Arminian Roman Catholic brother who wishes to be called something else if you think I'm 4/5 Arminian.

 

[Amy.G]

Is a 3 point Calvinist still a Calvinist?

How about a 4 pointer?