What's the difference between Fred and Frank?

[saturneptune]

Calvinists, please explain the clear distinction between Fred and Frank:

Fred is a "normal" unbelieving young man who has never heard the gospel.

Frank is a man who has been around God's revelations all his life and has chosen to continually rebel against Him. He has now "grown calloused" or "become hardened." (as spoken of in scripture Acts 28; Matt 13; Mark 4; John 12 etc)

Now, according to Calvinism both Fred and Frank were born Totally Depraved, meaning they were born unable to willingly see, hear, understand and repent once confronted by the gospel. However, in all the passages listed above it clearly tell us what a man who has not grow hardened might be able to do:

"For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'" Matt. 13

So, Calvinists, please explain the difference in a man who is merely totally depraved and a man who has "become hardened/calloused" in light of these passages. Can both Fred and Frank willingly "see, hear, understand and turn" or can't they? Explain.

This is another set up thread, like can God make a rock too heavy for Him to lift. If Fred has never heard the Gospel, how could he be hardened against it? By the way, you say that is a normal young man. Where does he live? You would have to live under a rock like the GEICO commerical not to hear the Gospel. Therefore, he probably has heard the Gospel. The distinction you make between the two is immaterial. One does not care, and the other actively dislikes the message. The end result is the same. It is called lost. Why one has grown hardened, and the other has not, what difference does it make? They are both in the same state.

Also, your senerio falls short, because you do not know what the future holds for these two young men. If God called them to salvation, that is, elected them, then they will come to salvation. The fallacy of your thread rests on two points. One is you do not know God's will, and two, you take a snapshot at one instant in time. The subject or the result is not nearly as simple as you paint the picture.

No, not according to Calvinism were they both born totally depraved. According to the Bible Romans 3:10. (that is in the NT). As usual, you take verses out of context to fit your neat little theory. They will not cease becoming hardened unless God intervenes, not the individual waking up one morning and saying, "Gee, I think I will become uncalloused today."

Taking the story further, it seems very odd to me that you believe we can choose to be saved on our own divine power, yet once saved, we cannot choose to become lost. No doubt God appreciates those who choose to follow His calling, as the Lord must tire of regenerating people all day long.

 

[Skandelon]

You have mentioned several times that you were once a Calvinist minister. I find this surprising since I am still not convinced that you really know what Calvinism is.

That makes us even because I'm not convinced that you really know what Arminianism is.

I posted once on this topic on another thread, and then amplified my response at your request. Clearly, neither of these have satisfied you, so I don't suppose a third effort will do any better.

Interesting you bring that up because in our last encounter in the thread titled "Total Depravity = Hardening?" you never did reply to my thorough response to you. Maybe you missed it? It is down the page on post #177 HERE IT IS>

Enjoy your horse-flogging.

I expect you to call out any Calvinists here who address any posts that have been discussed previously as also "horse-flogging" so as to not reveal your blatant double standard and expose the real motive behind these types of senseless accusations.

If there was something new in them there might be something interesting, but it seems to be the same old misunderstanding, endlessly repeated.

I think you might confuse "disagreement" with "misunderstanding." Maybe because it is easier for you to just say, "Oh, he doesn't understand" and then dismiss me, than it would be to engage in a civil and rational discussion. Maybe?

Considering that my questions and topics of discussion are very similar to many being discussed in scholarly journals and Cal/Arm debates around the nation and throughout Christian history I find it interesting to receive these types of responses. I think it more reveals your lack of knowledge and understanding about the real points of contention between Arminian and Calvinist scholars. Maybe if you engage in a civil discussion with me on the subject you could learn about these things and not sound so uninformed in the future.

 

[Skandelon]

If Fred has never heard the Gospel, how could he be hardened against it?

Exactly my point! Good.

Just like the Gentiles of Jesus day. How could they have grown hardened to God's revelations since they weren't the ones receiving them like the Jews were? That is why Paul clearly teaches that the Jews had "grown calloused otherwise they might see, hear, understand and repent," but the Gentiles "they will listen." Acts 28:21-28

By the way, you say that is a normal young man. Where does he live? You would have to live under a rock like the GEICO commerical not to hear the Gospel. Therefore, he probably has heard the Gospel.

So, you are just going to randomly change my pretend scenerio because you think its not possible that someone hasn't heard the gospel in this world? Really?

The distinction you make between the two is immaterial.

I guess it is if you change my scenerio to meet your presumption that everyone must have heard the gospel just like the GEIGO commercial.

I'm going to stop here because I feel like maybe I'm being "PUNKED" or something. This can't be a serious reply.... If it is I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be mean, but this is really getting absurd...

 

[saturneptune]

Exactly my point! Good.

Just like the Gentiles of Jesus day. How could they have grown hardened to God's revelations since they weren't the ones receiving them like the Jews were? That is why Paul clearly teaches that the Jews had "grown calloused otherwise they might see, hear, understand and repent," but the Gentiles "they will listen." Acts 28:21-28

So, you are just going to randomly change my pretend scenerio because you think its not possible that someone hasn't heard the gospel in this world? Really?

I guess it is if you change my scenerio to meet your presumption that everyone must have heard the gospel just like the GEIGO commercial.

I'm going to stop here because I feel like maybe I'm being "PUNKED" or something. This can't be a serious reply.... If it is I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be mean, but this is really getting absurd...

You are stopping here because you have nothing further to argue, especially the last paragraph. The problem with your threads is that you set up unreal events. Maybe you should sell your ideas to the SyFy channel.

 

[Skandelon]

You are stopping here because you have nothing further to argue, especially the last paragraph. The problem with your threads is that you set up unreal events. Maybe you should sell your ideas to the SyFy channel.

So its unreal to suppose that there is a man who hasn't heard the gospel and another who has heard it and has repeatedly rejected it? Really? That is so far fetched? My brother is a missionary in Turkey and he tells me of people who he has meet who have never heard the gospel all the time. And I know plenty here in the states who have heard it daily but have continually rejected it. What is so syfy about that?

That is why I stopped responding to your thread.

 

[Skandelon]

And with regard to your last paragraph:

it seems very odd to me that you believe we can choose to be saved on our own divine power

I don't know any believer in the world who holds to this view, so why would I need to reply? Go find someone who actually believes this non-sense and let them defend it.

 

[saturneptune]

And with regard to your last paragraph:

I don't know any believer in the world who holds to this view, so why would I need to reply? Go find someone who actually believes this non-sense and let them defend it.

Exactly the one I am speaking to. It takes a miracle to turn to the Lord. You are dismissing me because I refuse to follow your baiting logic. Those you accept your set ups at face value fall right into your planned arguments. You are very simple to see through.

 

[Skandelon]

Exactly the one I am speaking to.

If you can find me one non-Calvinistic scholar who makes the claim you accused me of believing I will apologize and leave this board to never return. Otherwise, you will be revealed for falsely misrepresenting a fellow believer, and Arminianism as a whole.

It takes a miracle to turn to the Lord.

I think the incarnation, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus was quite miraculous. And I believe the inspiration of the gospel, the indwelling of the messengers who carry it throughout the world is miraculous too. Don't you?

You are dismissing me because I refuse to follow your baiting logic.

By refusing to accept that there might be a person in this world who hasn't heard the gospel? Really?

Why don't you back up and start over brother. This doesn't need to be contentious. There is nothing "baiting" about the scenario of the OP. One guy has heard and has rebelled repeatedly and the other hasn't ever heard. What is the big deal? You have overreacted and wrongly accused me. I forgive you so let's move on.

 

[saturneptune]

If you can find me one non-Calvinistic scholar who makes the claim you accused me of believing I will apologize and leave this board to never return. Otherwise, you will be revealed for falsely misrepresenting a fellow believer, and Arminianism as a whole.

What does that have to do with anything? This is about you and your posts.

I think the incarnation, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus was quite miraculous. And I believe the inspiration of the gospel, the indwelling of the messengers who carry it throughout the world is miraculous too. Don't you?

No one said otherwise, and no one who believed otherwise would be on this board.

By refusing to accept that there might be a person in this world who hasn't heard the gospel? Really?

There are plenty people who have not heard to Gospel. They are lost just like the one who is rebelling. They are not two catagories.

Why don't you back up and start over brother. This doesn't need to be contentious. There is nothing "baiting" about the scenario of the OP. One guy has heard and has rebelled repeatedly and the other hasn't ever heard. What is the big deal? You have overreacted and wrongly accused me. I forgive you so let's move on.

Why don't you pick out a different subject one out of every 25 threads?

You never did answer the question as to how you have the ability to choose salvation but not to lose it?

 

[psalms109:31]

John 21:17
The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

1 John 2:
Warnings Against Denying the Son
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. 21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth[Some manuscripts and you know all things], but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

24 As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is what he promised us—eternal life.

26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

John 15:The Vine and the Branches
1 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes[The Greek for he prunes also means he cleans.] so that it will be even more fruitful. 3 You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.4Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.5“I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.6If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

Titus 1:9
He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

Hebrews 3:
12 See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. 14 We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end.

 

[Skandelon]

What does that have to do with anything? This is about you and your posts.

Its about you misrepresenting my posts and the Arminian beliefs. If you are going to make an accusation be ready to back it up with proof, otherwise don't bother making the point.

No one said otherwise, and no one who believed otherwise would be on this board.

Apparently they are not miraculous enough to bring someone to salvation though in your view, which was the point if you were following along.

There are plenty people who have not heard to Gospel.

Then what was your point about the GEICO commercial and when you said they have probably heard? You changing your mind on that now?

They are lost just like the one who is rebelling.

Never said they weren't both lost. Go back and read the OP again but slower this time.

We are talking about the difference of one who has "grown calloused" and one who hasn't.

Why don't you pick out a different subject one out of every 25 threads?

Why don't you ignore my posts if you don't care to discuss soteriology with me?

You never did answer the question as to how you have the ability to choose salvation but not to lose it?

I never made that point so why would I need to answer it? That is not the subject of this thread. If you want to discuss the doctrine of perseverance please start and new thread.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Interesting you bring that up because in our last encounter in the thread titled "Total Depravity = Hardening?" you never did reply to my thorough response to you. Maybe you missed it? It is down the page on post #177 HERE IT IS>

I saw your post, but I still feel quite happy with what I have written, and if that doesn't convince you, then I don't suppose writing another post is going to do any better. You seem to be rather settled in your opinion. However, I'll have another look and see if I can add anything that might be helpful. It may take a day or two though.

I expect you to call out any Calvinists here who address any posts that have been discussed previously as also "horse-flogging" so as to not reveal your blatant double standard and expose the real motive behind these types of senseless accusations.

If any of them open three different threads on almost exactly the same subject, as you have done, I certainly will.

Steve

 

[Skandelon]

I saw your post, but I still feel quite happy with what I have written, and if that doesn't convince you, then I don't suppose writing another post is going to do any better. You seem to be rather settled in your opinion.

It's ironic when people say things like this because it presumes they must be right and the other must be wrong thus revealing the very stubbornness and pride they accuse the other of having.

If any of them open three different threads on almost exactly the same subject, as you have done, I certainly will.

When a thread closes or is thrown off topic the discussions are often carried to a new thread, as per the request of the moderators. Maybe you didn't know that.

 

[Ron Wood]

Scripture indicates otherwise. There are clearly those who have "become hardened" and those who haven't as the verses I quoted prove.

All of which are a quote by the Lord or Paul of one single passage found in Isa. 6:9. Go read it and tell me it doesn't tell Isaiah to make the heart of the people hard and their ear dull. So when the Lord and Paul uses it they are making a clear point that those who are hardened are hardened by the preaching of the Gospel, 2Cor. 2:15-16 It is true that men harden their hearts against the Lord but it is also true that all of us will do exactly that if God doesn't intervene and cause His word to reach our heart. Your use of the passage as a prooftext of some being hardened and others not is not only a wrong application of the passage but completely misssing the point of the passage.

But what about when God seeks after them? Can they respond to his appeal to be reconciled?

When God seeks them they will respond because He doesn't seek that which He cannot attain. If He does He is no more than a man.

Actually, its Calvinists who deny the power of the gospel, because it is powerless UNLESS God first regenerates a man in your system. So the only power in you system is the effectual calling. The gospel in our system is what enables faith and respond. The gospel truely is the power of God unto salvation, not just a means for the elect to respond.

What twisted logic caused you to come up with this? In your system the power isn't in the Gospel it is in the preacher's ability to persuade. You can't simply preach the Gospel and let it do its work you must make it effectual by your persuasive powers. In our system the Gospel is never powerless. It always accomplishes the end for which God sends it, it is a savor of life or a savor of death. It is the preacher who is powerless not the Gospel.

Why would you assume otherwise? The appeal to be reconciled sent to whosoever will believe implies the ability to do just that. Only an explicit denial of that ability would cause one to believe otherwise.

The appeal in no way implies ability. I can call an insane man to be sane but he cannot do it. I can plead with all those folks in the graveyard to come up out of their graves but they cannot do it. God's commandments are an injunction to do what is right but they in no way give us ability or even imply that we have the ability to keep them.

We believe the "finger of Grace" is the work of the Holy Spirit is inspiring, preserving and carrying the powerful gospel into all the world. You believe it is some extra secret inward working that is never expounded upon or clearly revealed in the text.

John 16:8-14 is pretty clear what the work of the Spirit is. Find out what that means and you have the power of the Gospel.

Which is meaningless in a system where God determines the "wants" of man.

Nonsense! We never try to keep anyone out who wants in. Our system doesn't keep anyone out who wants in. You seem to want to twist our system so that you can reject it.

 

[Iconoclast]

How does this verse support that claim? Seems very vague and not at all related to what you seem to conclude from it.

Even if it is the reprobate it doesn't explain why it would say what they might do if they hadn't grown hardened... "Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'

Truth is that those Jews who are hardened are not the non-elect reprobates. How do I know? Because Paul believes that those who are temporarily hardened might come faith through envy of the Gentiles (Rm 11:14) and he believes they could leave their unbelief. Read it for yourself:

The others were hardened, 8 as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day." 9 And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. 10 May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever."
Ingrafted Branches
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. 22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.



Keep quoting: 14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: " 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'

Why would Jesus need to speak in parables to keep reprobates from turning and being healed? How might a totally depraved reprobate "see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and turn to be healed?"

The parables keep them in the dark because the truth might set them free and they might believe and be saved. That is the purpose of the parables. Why? Because if they believe then they wouldn't crucify Jesus, so its not until Peter preaches to them in Acts 2 after Christ is raised up that he draws them to himself and 2000 are saved. These are not the reprobates of your system.

So, someone needs to let Paul know because he is anticipating them to be provoked by envy and possibly leave their unbelief. They are hardened temporarily. (Rm. 11:25)

The passage is dealing with what has happened,not with what might have happened.

Even if it is the reprobate it doesn't explain why it would say what they might do if they hadn't grown hardened... "Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'

Truth is that those Jews who are hardened are not the non-elect reprobates. How do I know? Because Paul believes that those who are temporarily hardened might come faith through envy of the Gentiles (Rm 11:14) and he believes they could leave their unbelief. Read it for yourself:

that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

The gospel is going worldwide,it says until the fullness of the gentiles be come in.This takes thousands of years.Only the elect remnant was saved at that time. It is the elect remnant as opposed to the unbelieving apostates.Truth is,those Jews who were hardened were the apostate reprobates who have died in unbelief as covenant breakers and are in hell now.The verses you ignore teach it, thats why Paul quotes them...I only listed those from Isa.....there are more.

 

[canadyjd]

It's ironic when people say things like this because it presumes they must be right and the other must be wrong thus revealing the very stubbornness and pride they accuse the other of having...

Do you mean like the poster of Post #3 who said in response to iconoclast quoting psalm 110...

How does this verse support that claim? Seems very vague and not at all related to what you seem to conclude from it.

And the same poster in Post #5 in response to iconoclast elaborating on psalm 110...

Are you going to engage with my replies or just quote large clips of scripture which we both believe support our relative views of this subject?

Or perhaps that same poster in Post #15

I like discussing soteriology. Sue me.

and

Trying to help the dozens of readers who visit this forum every day who might otherwise be mislead, as I once was.

Or perhaps that same poster in Post #22:

I think you might confuse "disagreement" with "misunderstanding."Maybe because it is easier for you to just say, "Oh, he doesn't understand" and then dismiss me, than it would be to engage in a civil and rational discussion. Maybe?

And then a little more...

..I think it more reveals your lack of knowledge and understandingabout the real points of contention between Arminian and Calvinist scholars. Maybe if you engage in a civil discussion with me on the subject you could learn about these things and not sound so uninformed in the future.

I find it ironic you spend so much time talking about people who are blind, stubborn and prideful.

peace to youraying:

 

[Robert Snow]

How does this verse support that claim? Seems very vague and not at all related to what you seem to conclude from it.

You've got to forgive Iconoclast, he sees Calvinism behind every verse in the bible. :laugh:

 

[glfredrick]

You've got to forgive Iconoclast, he sees Calvinism behind every verse in the bible. :laugh:

Except that you have that exactly backward, you could be correct. Calvinists see God behind every verse of the Bible, not man... Seeing God behind every verse of the Bible is what brings us to the theology popularly called Calvinism.

What do you see behind every verse of the Bible?

 

[Robert Snow]

Except that you have that exactly backward, you could be correct. Calvinists see God behind every verse of the Bible, not man... Seeing God behind every verse of the Bible is what brings us to the theology popularly called Calvinism.

What do you see behind every verse of the Bible?

Well, it depends on which verse. In some verses I see the creation; some present the glory of God. Now, in some verses in the epistles, I see God offering to man salvation found in the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. I also see God not desiring that any man be lost, but that all come to repentance.

Titus 2:11 (NKJV)
11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,

2 Peter 3:9 (NKJV)
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.

I even see Jesus call all men to come to Him:

Matthew 11:28-30 (NKJV)
28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

 

[Skandelon]

Do you mean like the poster of Post #3 who said in response to iconoclast quoting psalm 110... And the same poster in Post #5 in response to iconoclast elaborating on psalm 110...
Or perhaps that same poster in Post #15 and Or perhaps that same poster in Post #22: And then a little more...I find it ironic you spend so much time talking about people who are blind, stubborn and prideful.

peace to youraying:

I'm not sure how any of those relate to my reply to this quote: "if that doesn't convince you, then I don't suppose writing another post is going to do any better. You seem to be rather settled in your opinion."

I was merely pointing out the obvious point this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Sure we are both "black" (i.e. settled in our opinion) which is what makes it "ironic" for him only to see that in me, but not in himself. Of course I believe I'm right, don't you? I just recognize that about both of us and don't use it as an excuse to end the discussion or make accusations.

With regard to my responses to iconoclast, how would you respond if I quoted a dozen verses or so without any explanations or interpretation and just expected you to believe that they mean what I think they must mean to support my views? Does that seem reasonable to you? I was merely calling him out on that point and I think I did so quite respectfully.

But thanks for taking all that time to go back and find all those blatantly prideful and stubborn quotes of mine....gosh I'm so mean. Now, do Aaron, Westmin, Webdog, Snow, glfredrick and the rest...oh and don't forget yourself. :tongue3: