Should Christians call themselves Calvinists?

Yes. You are quite the anomaly, but one of my favorites here.

 

Yeah, me too. They use big words this hillbilly doesn't understand. :laugh:

 

No, the scriptures do not teach a man is unable to repent, they teach repeatedly that some men REFUSE to repent. And Jesus told why, because they love darkness (sin).

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Jesus said here that he often wanted to save the Jews but the "would not".

This verse is non-sensical if Calvinism is true. First, how can Jesus expect the unregenerate to come to him? God would know they were not regenerate and could not possibly come to him. Did Jesus forget they were unregenerate?

If God chose to pass by these unregenerate man, then why does Jesus say he often tried to gather them as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings? That makes no sense, because according to Calvinism God does not want to save them, he has chosen to pass them by.

Now, if they could come, but refused of their own free will, then this verse makes perfect sense. If Calvinism is true, this verse is ridiculous and makes no sense at all.

 

Sure thing brother—Merry Christmas! I went to Auburn, but got my Master’s at UofM—but I’m a diehard Auburn fan! I love talking about the Reformation & reformed theology b/c that was my focus in my undergrad (with a major emphasis on the Swiss Reformation). While I don’t agree with all reformed theology—I love to read the writings of the reformers & see how they shaped modern biblical interpretation. That being said—I hope to hear from you again--& never take my disagreement as me saying you don’t know what your talking about—I use opposing view points to make me further study a given area, which in turn makes me have a better Scriptural understanding of my own personal interpretations.

 

Winman I keep responding to you in spite of good advice from very good friends on baptistboard NOT TO. I don't really know why but I do think I know why they advise me to stop.

Those reasons are the things that are going to cause you to not have ANYONE to debate on baptistboard. Before long EVERY Calvinist is going to ignore you and you will have NNE to engage.

Here is one of those reasons. You copy and paste about a dozen Scriptures in many of your posts that do not have a THING to do with what you are purporting- NOT A THING. Then we respond and show you that you are misusing those verses. You do not respond to our response. Instead you go on pasting verses that have nothing to do with what you are trying to say and then say that you have posted a dozen verses that teach that Calvinism is false.

That is your M.O.

And when all of us Calvinists finally give up on you, you will say you have won and that no Calvinist can answer your powerful arguments- but the only one on earth who will believe that- is you.

I will continue to debate you if you will stop this practice I have explained above.

Paste a verse or two. Explain what you think they mean. Let us respond. We will show you where we think you are wrong and perhaps paste a verse or two that teach Reformed theology. Then respond to our response by addressing our exegesis of both your passages and the ones we introduce. At this point you may add another verse or two. And then we will continue to go on from there in that fashion.

But pasting a dozen verses and refusing to respond to our exegesis of those passages and then coming on here and saying you've pasted a dozen verses that prove Calvinism is false- well that is intolerable.

 

As I said, getting attention is fine. You should have more care for those you call brothers and sisters in Christ than to throw-out comments like the one you did, especially given the placement in the thread.

That Fermat's theorem has or hasn't been proven is immaterial, hence the word "Supposedly." But, while it lay unproven since the 1600's (I believe), the entire science of mathematics was not in doubt.

And while thinking about theology and the logic of math, in this case, are similar, they are not identical.

Again, a word to the wise should be sufficient.

The Archangel

 

I will always try to be cordial and respectful. Even when we passionately disagree. Blessings. Look forward to getting to know you. Hope I dont tarnish your reputation to badly. :thumbs:

 

Again, I have plenty of care and concern for brothers and sisters. The "I am more wise and humble" routine can cease now. End of the "this" exchange between you and I. (for me)

 

Luke

Give me a break. All of the scripture I post relates to the discussion at hand. I go to lengths to find scripture that directly refutes your doctrine, and it is not difficult, there are literally hundreds of verses of scripture that clearly show Calvinism false.

I think the reason many Calvinists do not respond is because they know they can't. They can read, and they can clearly see much scripture refutes them. So, what do they do? Pretend like they didn't see it.

I can easily understand why you and other Calvinists do not like me pasting scripture here.

 

Q..... With friends like you......

Now, what am I going to tell my wife? That my friend Quantum called me & you & all our relatives back 6 generations......hers being Covenenters-One shot in the head by the British in front of his wife for being a Presbyterian. My Great Grand Dad a Calvinist Methodist Pastor who walked 20 miles (uphill each way) in the snow to provide Sabbath Services & who named his sons Matthew, Mark, Luke & John, to my brother who was a Fundimentalist wingnut pastor till he learned the ways of grace & is now studying latin to better understand the scriptures. What am I going to tell them?

I certainly know what they will tell you ....thats a certainty.

 

I hope you mean that in love brother.

 

Now now, Gentlemen a wise old man once told me "Son thinking is not knowing. either you know or you dont know. Which will it be?" He was a dynamite expert in coal mines throughout Pennsylvania. If he ever made a mistake or didnt think....well you know the rest of the story.

 

Just getting your attention bub.....can you hear the voices?

 

Calvinists DO respond to you Winman. You don't respond to their responses so finally they give up on you.

You have posted John 20:31 a dozen times. I ahve responded to that passage several times showing you where you are misinterpreting that pasage and you do not respond.

Listen to me Winman- I promise you that not one of us Calvinists are the least bit intimidated by your posts. We will gladly decimate your arguments if you will just stay in the pocket.

But you don't. You post a bunch of verses that say NOTHING that you are trying to get them to say.

And when we respond and show you that- you don't respond to our response.

Maybe YOU can't.

 

Loud and clear, dont think I will try that again.

 

Maybe the 13th time will get through to you.

John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

This verse easily teaches you have to believe to have life.

Calvinism teaches that a person must be regenerated to believe. And you define regeneration as being born again, having spiritual life.

Well, you can't have spiritual life while you are still dead in your sins, and until you trust Christ you are dead in your sins.

You have not refuted this whatsoever.

I'll ask you this simple question, does regeneration mean spiritual life??

 

I don't know your thoughts, but that does not mean I am not correct.

Isn't it possible I was correct?

 

I really do not have time for this, but since it is an easy one, and short, I will take it.

This sentence does not in any way denote causality, one after another. How do I know this? Because the same kind of participial construction is used, in the EXACT opposite manner, in another area of scripture. However, in the other case the construction is specifically time oriented, unlike this construction which simply uses the subjunctive mood to denote uncertainty (since Luke 8 tells us their are those who believe for a time, and then fall away, believing, for a limited temporal moment, does not gain eternal life.)

Note 1 John 5, which presents in the opposite manner, yet with an actual ordered element to it...

1Jn 5:1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him.

If you believe, you have been born again. Now, the Greek construction of this sentence in regards to the the order here, has been discussed ad nauseum, but the final outcome on that was that most Greek Grammars would support what I am saying. If you wish to look up the thread, I am sure it is in the archives, somewhere. I personally do not have the time.

 

While Calvinists do support pre-faith regeneration—most believe it’s a process that starts with the activities of the Holy Spirit (thus consider all pre-faith activities of the Holy Spirit under regeneration). But (according to the Calvinist understanding) regeneration is not complete until after one has faith. Thus they really don’t teach that you are completely saved (or have eternal life) without faith, just that you can not have faith until the regeneration process begins (ie the pre-faith activities of the Holy Spirit). But since I’m not a full blown Calvinist—I shouldn’t speak to much on what they do & do not endorse.
But how regeneration is being defined—is truly the central issue—so I do agree with that question you pose.