The Often Heard Modern Gospel

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

The sheer ignorance of many of the rank and file members in churches today on theological issues amazes me. I cannot tell you how many individuals that I have conversed with over the years look at me like I fell off of a banana boat when I try to explain to them some basic notions of Calvinistic theology, such as deals with repentance and faith. I might say, Calvinism teaches that men repent and believe because they have been regenerated first by the Holy Spirit...or according to Calvinistic thought, or that Calvinism teaches that dead men have no wills and make no choices, and that in order to be saved God must first regenerate their souls. Man cannot even repent or have faith until God regenerates them making repentance and faith possible. Both repentance and faith come subsequent to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit according to Calvinism. According to Calvinism, unsaved men are painted as dead logs floating down a stream, unable to repent or exercise faith until God first regenerates a chosen few, Such regeneration in reality took place before the foundations of the world on the behalf of the elect, and salvation is in reality when the individual first comes to the knowledge that they are one of the lucky ones ordained to eternal life. Salvation is not so much of them making a change of heart in repentance and faith, but rather of coming to the realization that from the foundation of the world they were chosen by God to salvation. Sound familiar? Is anyone listening to those like Biblicist as they spew this theology/philosophy at almost every juncture? Where is the cry from those not desiring to be labeled as 'Calvinistic'

The responses I have received are astounding. I hear things like, "my pastor doesn't say that," or "they don't believe or teach that in my church, or " I don't believe that." when I know for fact those things lie precisely behind the teachings they are sitting under, having been there and listened myself. The rank and file simply picks up on a few talking points like OSAS, my works have nothing to do with my faith, or nothing we do has any effect upon my eternal salvation, etc.

The pastors and teachers for the most part have a clearer understanding of their positions, but the amazing thing is this. They also know full well the further they teach in opposition to their basic theology, and emphasize and teach personal responsibility, the more results they have. So even holding onto Calvinistic error in their basic theology, they stray from that rigid system of confusion to instigate results in their parishioners. You will often hear, "You need to repent." or "You need to exercise faith" all the while honestly believing neither are conditions for salvation, and both will either by NECESSITY take place as a result of arbitrary selection involving regeneration by God alone, .... or they were simply never chosen to be regenerated in the first place.


And so on and so on the maelstrom of confusion is propagated service by service. Come on. Be honest and say Amen!

Disagree? Then let's see you counter the clear Calvinistic notions being presented by Biblicist/ (Dr. Walter?)

 

[The Biblicist]

The sheer ignorance of many of the rank and file members in churches today on theological issues amazes me.

Unfortunately, I think every denomination to some extent deals with this problem when it comes to understanding basic Bible doctrine.

I cannot tell you how many individuals that I have conversed with over the years look at me like I fell off of a banana boat when I try to explain to them some basic notions of Calvinistic theology, such as deals with repentance and faith. I might say, Calvinism teaches that men repent and believe because they have been regenerated first by the Holy Spirit...

You are being too general here. I for one do not believe regeneration occurs before repentance and faith in any kind of chronological order. I believe they are simeltaneous like the bullet and hole analogy. However, in regard to cause and effect or logical order the bullet is what makes the whole and repentance and faith is consequential.

However, few if any of our opponents distinguish between SPIRITUAL life by regeneration and JUDICIAL life by faith. The former is in connection with regeneration and the term "tekna" whereas the latter is in connection with justification and the term "huios." Neither is without the other but Judicial life is a consequence of spiritual life.

or according to Calvinistic thought, or that Calvinism teaches that dead men have no wills and make no choices,

Another misrepresentation. Lost people certainly do have wills and exercise them all the time in making choices. The issue is not the will or the power to choose, the issue is what influences the choice of the will.

The term "will" in the N.T. represents two Greek terms (1) Boulomai; (2) thelema; The former characterizes the will under the control of the mind/intellect (intellectual desires) and the latter characterizes the will under the controll of feelings (love/hate desires). The will is a servant of the heart and the heart is in bondage to sin and loves darkness and hates light.

According to Calvinism, unsaved men are painted as dead logs floating down a stream,

Another misrepresentation. Lost people are not passively floating down any stream but are actively fighting their way upstream against all the mercies of God in active defiance of God and all the mercies that should lead them to repentance. They cannot because they will not (Rom. 8:7).

Such regeneration in reality took place before the foundations of the world on the behalf of the elect,

Another complete misrepresentation. They are only chosen "to" salvation before the world began by the grace of God "through" regeneration and faith in the gospel in time and space - 2 Thes. 2:13-14.

Salvation is not so much of them making a change of heart in repentance and faith, but rather of coming to the realization that from the foundation of the world they were chosen by God to salvation.

Another complete distortion. Salvation involves election to glorification not merely regeneration. Regeneration is one aspect in salvation that is completed in the experience of repentance and faith by the elect without any outward coercion. Many of the elect never realize the truth of election but resist it because of such misrepresentations as presented by you.

Salvation is an act of mercy on God's part toward sinners - not getting what they deserve while justice is the act of God toward sinners getting what they deserve.

Salvation is an act of God's grace toward sinners in getting what they don't deserve and condemnation is an act of God toward sinners getting what they do deserve.

God can do with sinners as He pleases and whether it pleases Him to deal with some in mercy and others in wrath it is perfectly just and righteous (Rom. 9:18-24). Those He chooses to deal with according to wrath justly deserve it and hate God now and will all through eternity. Those He chooses to deal with according to mercy will confess they deserve eternal wrath as much as those that hate him without a cause.

Nothing prevents the worst sinner from being saved but their own resistant refusal to embrace the light of the gospel and nothing saves a sinner from his hatred of the light than the unmerited grace of God. Election simply explains why one does and the other doesn't.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: I for one do not believe regeneration occurs before repentance and faith in any kind of chronological order. I believe they are simeltaneous like the bullet and hole analogy. However, in regard to cause and effect or logical order the bullet is what makes the whole and repentance and faith is consequential.

HP: You might call your theory the Big Bang theory. BANG!! and it is all accomplished. Repentance, faith, and regeneration/salvation all in one, apart from anything that man can or could do. Such a notion makes a mockery out of true faith and repentance, and depicts a completely necessitated salvation experience. Nothing can happen until BANG! It all happens with nothing preceding of following anything else through no effort or fault on our part whatsoever. If it happens it is all of God. If it does not happened all can be blamed on God. If any are saved all is because of God alone. If any are damned it is all because of God alone, because He chose not to go BANG!!

You took issue with my comment, which by the way was nothing more or less than the precise words I have heard in more than one Calvinistic church, (that dead men have no wills nor make any choices) yet your Big Bang theory says in effect the very same thing but in a slightly different way. Your theory in essence says that the will of man is fixed and that completely by his evil heart, therefore nothing he does or can do in any way has an impact on anything that happens contrary to his wicked heart, therefore has no effect upon salvation whatsoever, like a dead log floating down the stream, when either a BANG! happens or it doesn't. There is not even a scintilla of distinction between whet you are presenting and the comment of men (morally speaking) like dead logs floating down a stream, having absolutely no ability to do anything other than to will and act in accordance, in lock step, with the wicked heart that necessitates their every move. Just as a puppet has no will and makes no choices other than those determined by the puppeteer, man has no will distinct from the necessitated influences of his inner man and or sensibilities, which serve the very same purpose as a puppeteer of the man.

Sorry, but I fail to see any distinction thus far between yourself and any run of the mill Calvinist on this issue.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

It only get more absurd the deeper you look into the philosophical theories of Biblicist on the will of man. If it is impossible for a man to will in any other direction than his heart dictates according to its character, consider the following.

Will Biblicist tell us a man can willingly resist God's offer of salvation? How can that be? Gods offer is a just and righteous offer is it not? If man cannot act in any other way than his wicked heart necessitates him to act, resisting God would not be a choice either, for again he can do nothing that is not necessitated by his nature or heart. IF MAN CAN ONLY ACT IN ONE DIRECTION WITH ONLY POSSIBLE CONSEQUENT FOR ANY GIVEN ANTECEDENT, CHOICE IS IMPOSSBLE. Choice necessitates two or more possible alternative consequences being possible for any given antecedent.

With that being said, now consider what must happen in order, under the theory of the will according to Biblicist, in order to resist an offer by God. Biblicist states that in order to accept salvation one must be regenerated which makes it possible to exercise faith and repentance. He claims that regeneration must take place in order to have faith or repent, so without regeneration it is impossible to have faith or repent. How can one have the ability to stop God from regenerating the heart or refusing to regenerate the heart, the regeneration of the heart being absolutely necessary before one could even think of doing something opposed to ones heart condition, let alone act upon it volitionally? Is not salvation, repentance and faith at direct antipodes to a selfishly fixed heart?

If one chooses to 'accept' salvation, he had to be regenerated before he chose, and once regenerated to 'choose to remain unsaved' would be to say my will is stronger than God Himself and is able to negate the very work of regeneration that God accomplished for him to believe, repent, and accept salvation. Oh, I almost forgot. ALL of these things happen simultaneous according to Biblicist, which means my will has to be able to not only stop, but reverse the very act of God upon my heart that was granted in order for my selfish will to have the capacity to choose something other than what God has accomplished in regeneration.

Now that is indeed a question to ponder. If my will is strong enough to not only resist but to eliminate (one in reality would have to undo the act of God in regeneration which makes repentance and faith possible) an act already accomplished by God, as a still unsaved individual, why could not the will of a regenerated heart do the same??

The notion that God regenerates the heart before, or simultaneous with repentance and faith, (with repentance and faith being both products of God as well as regeneration/salvation) is nothing short of absurdity, and has no other end but to land one in the maelstrom of confusion such a system of necessity and fatalism imbibes.

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: You might call your theory the Big Bang theory. BANG!! and it is all accomplished. Repentance, faith, and regeneration/salvation all in one, apart from anything that man can or could do.

Again a complete mischaracterization of my position. Only in regeneration is the elect passive. It is regeneration that provides active response by man in conversion to the gospel.

The elect is passive in receiving the new heart as that is a CREATIVE act of God (Eph. 2:10 "created in Christ Jesus"; 4:24; Col. 3:10). However, reception of the New heart activates an experience of conversion to the gospel because unlike the previous old heart that HATES light and LOVES darkness (Jn. 3:18-20) the "new" heart LOVES light and HATES darkness and it is "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness" [justification by faith].

God merely allows the elect to freely choose in keeping with the heart they have which HATES the light and LOVES the darkness and freely "WILL NOT COME TO THE LIGHT". He has the perfect right to allow fallen man to freely resist and choose destruction just as he has the right

Rom. 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.......
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

You took issue with my comment, which by the way was nothing more or less than the precise words I have heard in more than one Calvinistic church, (that dead men have no wills nor make any choices)

You should get out more often. You can hear any number of things depending on where you go and who you are listening to.

yet your Big Bang theory says in effect the very same thing but in a slightly different way. Your theory in essence says that the will of man is fixed and that completely by his evil heart, therefore nothing he does or can do in any way has an impact on anything that happens contrary to his wicked heart, therefore has no effect upon salvation whatsoever, like a dead log floating down the stream, when either a BANG! happens or it doesn't.

Absolutely false. The human will of lost people is always active and is constantly choosing alternatives apart from any EXTERNAL coercion. However, not apart from INTERNAL coercion as the human will is nothing more or less than the expression of the heart, a heart that FREELY loves darkness and FREELY hates light and the human will is the FREE expression of those loves and hates. This is why Stephen said that the lost man ALWAYS RESISTS the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51). That is his FREE choice according to his own HEART without any external coercion whatsover. That is Why God must given a NEW heart and why Jesus FIRST told Nicodemus and those like him "YE must be born again" before ever telling him about the gospel because the natural heart LOVES darkness and HATES light and thus FREELY "WILL NOT COME TO THE LIGHT."

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: Salvation is an act of mercy on God's part toward sinners - not getting what they deserve while justice is the act of God toward sinners getting what they deserve.

Salvation is an act of God's grace toward sinners in getting what they don't deserve and condemnation is an act of God toward sinners getting what they do deserve.

HP: Let the reader notice what justice is to Biblicist. He states that the sinner, who is a sinner by absolutely no fault of his own, a sinner from his very conception apart from the least choice to sin, deserves to receive condemnation from God for being nothing other than what he was created as, i.e., a sinner. That is justice according to Biblicist. Who is he kidding? There would not be a shred of justice in God to condemn a man for the state he was born in, nor would there be a shred of justice in God to condemn a man for doing something impossible to avoid. That is opposed to any notion of reason as well as being opposed to Scripture. From the OT top the NT sinful man is painted as a willing rebel and is accountable for his own sins not those of another.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Biblicist: God can do with sinners as He pleases and whether it pleases Him to deal with some in mercy and others in wrath it is perfectly just and righteous (Rom. 9:18-24).

HP: Such an interpretation of that verse makes God out to be an arbitrary God, and insinuates there is no distinction between a just act and an arbitrary one. Nothing could be further from the truths set forth in this passage. God is Just. Being Just has meaning and in no wise indicates arbitrary selection of the elect by any stretch of the imagination. Neither does the passage in question state or imply what Biblicist claims it does.

The passage first deals with the manner in which God chose to bestow special favor on the nation Israel. The latter portion justifies God in the manner in which He propagates salvation and to whom it is offered. God is under absolutely no obligation to insure that every man receives the gospel message, nor will every man receive it. Just as He chose the nation Israel to receive of his mercy in opposition to making it generally available to all nations, God is just in the manner He has chosen to spread His gospel message. He has insured that there will always be a seed left to propagate the gospel, but again He is under no obligation to insure that all receive the offer. Justice in no wise demands that the gospel be given to all sinners, for God is NOT the author of sin. Neither is Adam the author of all sin, for sin preceded Adam. The Scriptures tell us that all are sinners because "all have sinned." Sin is the results of willful and voluntary rebellion to a known commandment of God, and for that reason, God is indeed justified in condemning the sinner and is justified in not all receiving the message of salvation. They have all willing rebelled personally without force or coercion, and God is under no obligation to save all or see to it that all receive the gospel message. That is the import of this passage, and not that God arbitrarily elects some to salvation and others arbitrarily to condemnation.

 

[The Biblicist]

It only get more absurd the deeper you look into the philosophical theories of Biblicist on the will of man. If it is impossible for a man to will in any other direction than his heart dictates according to its character, consider the following.

Your line of logic is first established upon a false premise and therefore your conclusion will be consistent with your false premise.

Will Biblicist tell us a man can willingly resist God's offer of salvation?

51 ¶ Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

How can that be? Gods offer is a just and righteous offer is it not? If man cannot act in any other way than his wicked heart necessitates him to act, resisting God would not be a choice either, for again he can do nothing that is not necessitated by his nature or heart. IF MAN CAN ONLY ACT IN ONE DIRECTION WITH ONLY POSSIBLE CONSEQUENT FOR ANY GIVEN ANTECEDENT, CHOICE IS IMPOSSBLE. Choice necessitates two or more possible alternative consequences being possible for any given antecedent.

Jesus did not say "can not" he said "will not" and that is the difference between what I am saying and what your false premise is suggesting. The words "will not" demand a free choice is being made.

You cannot dissect the human will from the human being and that is precisely what you are trying to do and trying to define FREE choice upon. That is absurd. God has FREE Choice and yet it is his heart that determines what he "WILL NOT" choose as His heart is completely HOLY and RIGHTEOUS and His will is but the servant to express his own heart.

The same is true in the lost man. His will FREELY expresses his own heart. Since his own heart HATES light and LOVES darknes than his will FREELY CHOOSES to do what is consistent with what he HATES and and what he LOVES just as God's Will freely chooses according to what God HATES and what God LOVES. - It is just that simple.

How can one have the ability to stop God from regenerating the heart or refusing to regenerate the heart, the regeneration of the heart being absolutely necessary before one could even think of doing something opposed to ones heart condition, let alone act upon it volitionally? Is not salvation, repentance and faith at direct antipodes to a selfishly fixed heart?

Does the Bible keep it a secret that the mindset of EVERY lost person is "at enmity with God and not subject to the law of God and neither indeed can be"(Rom. 8:7)???

Does the Bible keep it a secret that in regard to the lost man whether Jew or Gentile (Rom. 3:9) there is "none righteous, no not one"? or that the lost man is condemned already and LOVES darkness and HATES light and "will not come to the light" (Jn. 3:18-20)???????

Does the Bible keep it a secret that the lost man "ALWAYS RESISTS" the Holy Spirit by free will (Acts 7:51)???

Hence, what must be saved is the HUMAN WILL as it ALWAYS FREELY chooses darkness and ALWAYS FREELY resists the Holy Spirit.

Here is where justice and grace meet in God's purpose of redemption. God is dealing with THIS KIND OF FREE WILL which will ALWAYS FREELY CHOOSE darkness than light if left to itself.

God's justice is served by allowing the non-elect to continue in their FREE CHOICE to love darkness, hate light, resist the Holy Spirit IN SPITE OF all the goodness of God that should lead them to repentance if not for their own FREE WILL to hate light. That is perfectly Just for God to leave them to their own free will.

God's mercy is served by graciously giving a NEW HEART to the elect so that they FREELY REPENT AND BELIEVE in the Gospel and love light and hate darkness. Paul on the road to Damascus is a Christ hater that God changed in the middle of seeking to kill Christians. Here is how he explained his salvation experience:

Gal. 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Paul likens his new birth to his physical birth. He was born again, not of blood [physical birth], nor of the will of the flesh [his own will], nor of the will of man [another man's choice], but of God. - Jn. 1:13

He was not born again when it pleased him as the primary cause but "when it pleased God." His salvation was when it please God "to reveal his Son in me" and this is exactly what Paul refers to in 2 Cor. 4:6 or by divine Fiat, a CREATIVE act comparable when God spoke light into existence in Genesis 1:3 so likewise the new birth is a CREATIVE act of God whereby LIGHT is spoken into existence by God in Paul on the road to Demascus while on his way to FREELY persecute Christ, God changed his heart to FREELY submit to Christ:

2 Cor. 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: Again a complete mischaracterization of my position. Only in regeneration is the elect passive. It is regeneration that provides active response by man in conversion to the gospel.

HP: Pardon me? I never misrepresented your position in the least. Here is your quote:

Biblicist: I for one do not believe regeneration occurs before repentance and faith in any kind of chronological order. I believe they are simeltaneous like the bullet and hole analogy. However, in regard to cause and effect or logical order the bullet is what makes the whole and repentance and faith is consequential.

HP: Neither repentance or faith precede regeneration, but all are "simultaneous." If they are simultaneous, and all are caused by God in a moment, that is indeed nothing short of a "Big Bang" theory. Man can do nothing, not even repent before regeneration, and even then, all are acts of God and not man according to you. If regeneration has taken place along with repentance and faith, again all acts of God and not man, pray tell me what is left but necessitated salvation??? Who could resist the very necessitated acts of God upon their lives apart from their will being involved?? If the will of man is involved, that involves choices, and if choices must be made choices must be chosen by the will, and if the will is involved there is salvation by works according to you, is it not? "nor by the will of man', remember??

Biblicist: The elect is passive in receiving the new heart as that is a CREATIVE act of God (Eph. 2:10 "created in Christ Jesus"; 4:24; Col. 3:10).
HP: The elect are "passive", in your own words, not mine. They are passive like dead logs floating down a stream as far as salvation, regeneration, repentance, or faith are concerned. If that is not pure unadulterated fatalism and arbitrary selection, nothing is.
Biblicist: However, reception of the New heart activates an experience of conversion to the gospel because unlike the previous old heart that HATES light and LOVES darkness (Jn. 3:18-20) the "new" heart LOVES light and HATES darkness and it is "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness" [justification by faith].

HP: What is this notion of 'reception' all about??? You just stated man is passive in the very sentence before. Either man is passive or he is not. You cannot have your cake and eat it to. Pick one or the other and stand still long enough to show some indication of consistency. Is man passive or is his will active?? If you say active, let me ask you a further question. If in fact regeneration, repentance and faith are all works of God, and man is passive in receiving them, what possibly could be left to finalize salvation?? Are you telling me that one can resist the regeneration, repentance and faith you say are works of God upon their life? If so, you have made mans will stronger than God's abilities, or have made God's implanted acts less than capable of finalizes what you say is accomplished. Scripture tells us that when true repentance and faith takes place, salvation is accomplished.

Biblicist: God merely allows the elect to freely choose in keeping with the heart they have which HATES the light and LOVES the darkness and freely "WILL NOT COME TO THE LIGHT". He has the perfect right to allow fallen man to freely resist and choose destruction just as he has the right

HP: Who are you fooling? "Freely choose' something you say is accomplished by "passive " man? You do not have the foggiest of the nature of freedom. Freedom can only exist where there is an honest ability to do something other than what one does under the very same set of circumstances. Are you suggesting that man's will can undo the regeneration, repentance and faith God has already done in a moment in finality in the life of the elect? So the elect, those that God regenerates, repents and instills faith on their behalf in a moment upon a passive individual, can resist these acts of God? I thought they were passive?? Besides, what ever happened to OSAS? What ever happened to being an elect, foreknown by God from before the foundations of the earth? If what you suggest is true, God would have to be going around regenerating, instilling repentance and faith in every living soul, then waiting around to see if they somehow resist His work of salvation in their lives by rejecting all three, all while passive, remember? What a meaningless waste of effort that would be. What useless gyrations you put God through.
God out doing something that He already knows is futile from the beginning? Man resisting the very act of God upon their life, resisted in a passive state, remember? God's work of regeneration, repentance and faith not being able to accomplish their ends, with man's will being the deciding factor?? "nor by the will of man." Remember that verse?

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: Pardon me? I never misrepresented your position in the least. Here is your quote:

My quote is not comprehensive of what I believe but merely a summary. However, your response mischaracterizes my quote because you INTERPRET what you think I mean by it. Your interpretation is INCORRECT. If you really want to understand what I meant by that SUMMARY statement then deal with the explanation I gave instead of ignoring it and starting an argument between YOUR INTEPRETATION and my SUMMARY statement. I can't write a whole commentary in response to everything you say!!!! Please allow me to explain my own statements rather than trying to attempt to explain them for me!?!

Biblicist: The elect is passive in receiving the new heart as that is a CREATIVE act of God (Eph. 2:10 "created in Christ Jesus"; 4:24; Col. 3:10).
HP: The elect are "passive", in your own words, not mine. They are passive like dead logs floating down a stream as far as salvation, regeneration, repentance, or faith are concerned.

You are intentionally misrepresenting me again. I explicitly limited the passive aspect to regeneration not to repentance or faith and you know it. Just read what I said. However, your mischaracterization of my words is necessary to save face. Just look at the very next quote below to see you are purposely misrepresenting me:

Biblicist: However, reception of the New heart activates an experience of conversion to the gospel because unlike the previous old heart that HATES light and LOVES darkness (Jn. 3:18-20) the "new" heart LOVES light and HATES darkness and it is "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness" [justification by faith].

HP: What is this notion of 'reception' all about??? You just stated man is passive in the very sentence before. Either man is passive or he is not.

Man is passive in regeneration because it is a CREATIVE act and he has no ability to create (Eph. 2:10 "for we are HIS WORKmanship created in Christ Jesus). Man is passive in regeneration becuase it is not of the will of man or of the flesh (Jn.1:13). Man is passive in regeneration because he is receiving it not doing it.

However, regeneration is not to be confused with conversion. Regeneration provides the love for light and hate for darkness (new heart) whereby man actively "with the heart beleiveth unto righteousness."

You cannot have your cake and eat it to. Pick one or the other and stand still long enough to show some indication of consistency. Is man passive or is his will active??

Your statement above is as foolish as saying "You are either regenerated or converted but it can't be both so pick one or the other." Your logic would demand that regeneration is conversion and therefore if regeneration is passive so must conversion be passive. However, that is not true to God's Word. They are not one and the same. Regeneration is passive and any elementary study of God's word demonstrates that over and over again. Conversion is active and any elementary study of God's Word proves that over and over again.

Can you Create? No! So if you are "created in Christ Jesus" then you must be passive as you are the object not the actor of creating - Eph. 2:10; 4:24; Col. 3:10; Jn. 1:13; James 1:18; etc.

Can the person created in Christ believe? Yes! So conversion/repentance and faith are active attributes of that heart "WITH THE HEART man believeth" - Rom. 10:10

No sense commenting on the rest of your post because it is based upon false premises.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: You are intentionally misrepresenting me again. I explicitly limited the passive aspect to regeneration not to repentance or faith and you know it.

HP: I am simply pointing out that if regeneration, repentance and faith are all of God, and no one notion precedes the other (like your bullet in the hole analogy) and man is passive as you state he is, he is either passive or he is not in all three or he is passive in none. You change your arguments like a chameleon changes colors. Trying to debate you is like trying to debate which singular color a three colored signal is. As fast as I respond, you change the color.

Biblicist: Man is passive in regeneration because it is a CREATIVE act and he has no ability to create (Eph. 2:10 "for we are HIS WORKmanship created in Christ Jesus).

HP: Are you even trying to be serious? You honestly believe the Scripture you posted states or insinuates that man has 'no ability to create?' If he has no ability to create, he has no ability to choose anything whatsoever on his own. He is necessitated by God, or necessitated by nature, or necessitated by whatever it may be, but does not and cannot possess the least freedom whatsoever. Either man is free to create his intents or he is not free. You cannot speak of freedom to choose and them tell us we can accept or reject anything, unless you think that a puppet accepts or rejects the forces that tie it to whatever might be or act as its puppeteer. Again, you contradict yourself at every turn by whatever is convenient at the time or sounds plausible at the moment.

If man cannot create, at least try and be consistent. He would be a passive creature that can only respond to inner or outward stimuli. and must in fact respond to such stimuli for he is passive, and could not if he tried, choose (by the creation of a choice contrary to such stimuli) anything other than what was necessitated by that stimuli or his nature or whatever such stimuli is called. Freedom to you is nothing more than a word useful in hoodwinking others into believing you hold to something you do not. Freedom is a tool to manipulate to your advantage at will, not something that demands consistency to any set principles governing the usage of the word.

Biblicist: Man is passive in regeneration becuase it is not of the will of man or of the flesh (Jn.1:13). Man is passive in regeneration because he is receiving it not doing it.

HP: Fine. Man is passive. I get it. Why them do you think for a minute that a passive individual could resist anything? Again, you use the word 'passive,' not as a word with fixed meaning, but rather twist the meaning of passive at every turn to your advantage. If resisting or choosing to reject is not the creation of something, the Pope is not a Catholic. Tell us, what force or coercion causes the impulse of resistance, ...again in a passive man?

Biblicist: However, regeneration is not to be confused with conversion. Regeneration provides the love for light and hate for darkness (new heart) whereby man actively "with the heart beleiveth unto righteousness."

HP: Here we go again. First man is completely passive, and is regenerated, made to repent and believe. You now tell us those things do no accomplish salvation. You tell us that when we are regenerated we now have light and a hate of darkness.

Now it does not take a rocket scientist to put your positions together in a logical fashion. Man is passive in receiving regeneration which gives to man light and a hate for darkness. Man cannot, according to you, choose anything other than what the inner self demands, which is to hate light and love evil. Now mans inner self desires, through nothing on its own. a love for truth and a HATE FOR DARKNESS.

Questions to the list: Where is the least notion of freedom or choice in anything Biblicist has set forth. Man is driven by inner impulses, and cannot do anything other than what those impulses force upon his will. First he has an impulse he cannot resist to hate the light and eschew righteousness. Now he has an impulse Biblicist tells us is forced upon his inner man (being passive in the receiving of it) by God that somehow he can resist if he so chooses. (??) Where does this ability to resist come from in a passive man, and how can one driven by inner impulses alone resist something now ruling in his life as evidenced by repentance and faith, which are also granted to a passive heart apart from any choice on its own? If he resist this 'new man' Biblicist speaks of, how can that happen from a heart that now has a "love for light and a hate for darkness?"

So we are back to the deterministic fatalism of Calvinism. We are back to the double predestination Calvin knew and recognized as a necessitated end of his theory of salvation. Some God chooses to regenerate and grant to them a new heart, and to others He refuses to grant them the necessary means to repent and exercise faith to salvation.

And the fatalistic deterrminism goes on and on and on....

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: I am simply pointing out that if regeneration, repentance and faith are all of God, and no one notion precedes the other (like your bullet in the hole analogy) and man is passive as you state he is, he is either passive or he is not in all three or he is passive in none. You change your arguments like a chameleon changes colors. Trying to debate you is like trying to debate which singular color a three colored signal is. As fast as I respond, you change the color.

Complete misrepresentation again! Misrepresentation is your modus operandi for winning arguments! You are the only chaeleon in this debate.

Read my words again. The bullet and hole analogy was carefully explained to you in regard to (1) chronology and (2) logical order.

Chronological they are simelataneous but logically the bullet made the hole. Likewise, chronologically regeneration and conversion are simeltaneous but logically regeneration precedes conversion as life precedes action.

However, your argument above is based upon chronological while ignoring logical order! Both are true not just one.

HP: Are you even trying to be serious? You honestly believe the Scripture you posted states or insinuates that man has 'no ability to create?'

John 1:13 attributes the new birth to whose will? Man or God's?

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Ephesians 2:10 attributes the work of Creation to who? God or us?

For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Do our good works precede or follow this creative work of God? "unto" is the key word here that follows but does not preceded as what precedes verse 10 is "not of works lest any man should boast."

If man cannot create, at least try and be consistent. He would be a passive creature that can only respond to inner or outward stimuli. and must in fact respond to such stimuli for he is passive, and could not if he tried, choose (by the creation of a choice contrary to such stimuli) anything other than what was necessitated by that stimuli or his nature or whatever such stimuli is called.

Again total misrepresentation! What is passive is the ACT of regeneration because it is GOD'S ACT upon us! What is ACTIVE is conversion. Regeneration is being given a "new heart" by God which is the "CAUSE" for our response - "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness" as a free choice in keeping with that new heart as free a choice as God's will is as an expression of His righteous heart.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

For it is God which worketh IN YOU both TO WILL and TO DO of his good pleasure - Philip. 2:13

HP: Fine. Man is passive. I get it. Why them do you think for a minute that a passive individual could resist anything?

Man is passive in the work of regeneration not in his previous life under the influence of his old heart that loves darkness and hates light! His will is actively resistant so that it "WILL NOT COME" to the light in that condition.

HP: Here we go again. First man is completely passive, and is regenerated, made to repent and believe. You now tell us those things do no accomplish salvation.

Another complete distortion of what I said and explained over and over and over to you. He is passive only in regeneration NOT IN CONVERSION. Regeneration imparts SPIRITUAL life whereas repentance and faith obtain JUSTIFICATION or LEGAL eternal life before God. The former is our CONDITION on earth while the latter is our POSTION in heaven before the law - we are brought out from under ETERNAL CONDEMNATION DEATH legally to delcartion of ETERNAL LIFE legally.

The former is called REGENERATION while the latter is called JUSTIFICATION. What is regenerated is our spirit by God's spirit (Jn. 3:6; Eph. 4:18). What is justified is our POSITION before the Law of God by repentance and faith.

Now it does not take a rocket scientist to put your positions together in a logical fashion. Man is passive in receiving regeneration which gives to man light and a hate for darkness. Man cannot, according to you, choose anything other than what the inner self demands, which is to hate light and love evil. Now mans inner self desires, through nothing on its own. a love for truth and a HATE FOR DARKNESS. [/FONT][/COLOR]

You still do not recognize that conversion is the active aspect of initial salvation whereby "with the [new] heart man believeth unto righteousness" as the old heart "WILL NOT" because that heart LOVES darkness and HATES light. Therefore his will is active in conversion in keeping with his new heart just as God's will is active in keeping with God's righteous heart. God can no more choose darkness than a lost man can choose light becuase in each case it is the KIND OF HEART that determines the ACTIVE choice.

Questions to the list: Where is the least notion of freedom or choice in anything Biblicist has set forth. Man is driven by inner impulses, and cannot do anything other than what those impulses force upon his will.

The will is not independent of the heart in man or in God. The will is not a little man inside man who has his own love and hates independent from the man. God does not have a little man called "will" within him that is independent from his heart that has its own love and hates!!! But that is exactly how you portray the will. The will always, always expresses the heart "with the heart man believeth" or disbeleiveth depending on the LOVE and HATE of the heart!

First he has an impulse he cannot resist to hate the light and eschew righteousness. Now he has an impulse Biblicist tells us is forced upon his inner man (being passive in the receiving of it) by God that somehow he can resist if he so chooses. (??)

You are distorting the biblical position again! It is the heart that disposes the will and the will acts without any external coercison. It is the heart that the will always expresses and serves. God's will is just as in much bondage to His own heart as Man's will is in bondage to his own heart. Love for darkness does not express love for light and hated of light does not express love for light.

Where does this ability to resist come from in a passive man,

Man is only passive in the creative work of regeneration! Get it? Before that he is very active in resistance to light. You are totally distorting what I said and what the Scriptures teach and doing so intentionally.


[

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: The bullet and hole analogy was carefully explained to you in regard to (1) chronology and (2) logical order.

Chronological they are simelataneous but logically the bullet made the hole. Likewise, chronologically regeneration and conversion are simeltaneous but logically regeneration precedes conversion as life precedes action.

However, your argument above is based upon chronological while ignoring logical order! Both are true not just one.

HP: The truth is that it does not matter whether you try to indicate chronological order in one breath, and when called on that point you point to what you say is logical order, and then tell me they are both true. The point I make remains precisely the same. It does not matter whether or not the bullet or the hole comes first, both are necessitated by God alone in your theory of salvation, and man is passive in the process. The fact remains, that salvation is necessitated upon some lucky ones, and all means by which salvation could be possible in those not elected have never had, nor will ever have, the opportunity to reject anything, for the means by with to reject anything is not possible prior to the regeneration you say makes choice, subsequent or during regeneration, possible.
Your position logically necessitates double predestination: Some are damned from eternity past, and some lucky ones to salvation. You reason in a circle Biblicist and end up in confusion and error.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1760992#post1760992
HP: Are you even trying to be serious? You honestly believe the Scripture you posted states or insinuates that man has 'no ability to create?'

Biblicist: John 1:13 attributes the new birth to whose will? Man or God's?

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

HP: John 1:13 speaks directly of the grounds of salvation, and has nothing to say directly in this verse concerning the God stated conditions for man to fulfill. You treat Scripture like the blind man views the elephant. Just as it can be said a pardon is not by the will or flesh of any prisoner, it cannot be concluded that somehow no conditions are mandated by the governor, without which no pardon will or justly can be granted. You are trying to make a verse stand on all four legs to support your deterministic fatalism, when in fact it does no such thing.

The grounds of salvation and the means by which God accomplishes satifying the law and its penalty by no menas precludes man having to meet the stated conditions by God in order to be saved. Because the will of man does nothing to create the notion of salvation, nor does it in any way determine or create the necessary atonement needed for salvation does in no way preclude that the will is active in responding to the set conditions God has set forth, without which no man shall receive of his free gift of salvation. The will cannot work for salvation any more than a prisoner can merit a pardon by his actions in prison, yet that does not preclude the fact that God commands everyman everywhere to exercise their wills in repentance and faith, without which all will be lost. Repentance and exercising faith are things God commands man to do, things that God will never do for any man as you falsely conclude He does.

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: The truth is that it does not matter whether you try to indicate chronological order in one breath, and when called on that point you point to what you say is logical order, and then tell me they are both true. The point I make remains precisely the same.

No it does not remain the same! The chronological order denies one can occur without the other but the logical order presents the CAUSE AND EFFECT relationship between them and these two factors must be recognized or the result is the error you embrace.

It does not matter whether or not the bullet or the hole comes first, both are necessitated by God alone in your theory of salvation, and man is passive in the process

Complete and utter distortion again! Man is only passive in the regeneration and scripture clearly and explicitly teaches this. Man is ACTIVE in the conversion aspect and scripture clearly and explicitly teaches this. So it is not ONE OR THE OTHER as you demand. Nor is it all passive as you conclude and base your whole response on!

The fact remains, that salvation is necessitated upon some lucky ones,

There is absolutely no luck whatseover involved here but purposeful election by God before the foundation of the world (Acts 13:48; 2 Thes. 2:13; Eph. 1:4; Rom. 8:28-32).

and all means by which salvation could be possible in those not elected have never had, nor will ever have, the opportunity to reject anything, for the means by with to reject anything is not possible prior to the regeneration you say makes choice, subsequent or during regeneration, possible.

The unregenerated man FREELY CHOOSES TO RESIST (Acts 7:51) in keeping with his heart which HATES light and LOVES darkness (Jn. 3:18-20) and God is perfectly just to allow him to keep on FREELY CHOOSING according to his own heart.

Your position logically necessitates double predestination: Some are damned from eternity past, and some lucky ones to salvation. You reason in a circle Biblicist and end up in confusion and error.

The term "elect" or "election" is NEVER used of those who reject Christ and go to hell! NEVER! Election is ALWAYS "to" salvation (2 Thes. 2:13). Election is God's gracious response to universal rejection by man that would necessarily according to divine justice demand the wholesale damnation of the whole human race and JUSTLY so! Only the GRACE of God can be attributed to the salvation of the "ungodly."

HP: John 1:13 speaks directly of the grounds of salvation, and has nothing to say directly in this verse concerning the God stated conditions for man to fulfill.

Absolutely FALSE! John 1:13 directly address the role of the "will" in the act of regeneration!

Jn. 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

You treat Scripture like the blind man views the elephant. Just as it can be said a pardon is not by the will or flesh of any prisoner, it cannot be concluded that somehow no conditions are mandated by the governor, without which no pardon will or justly can be granted. You are trying to make a verse stand on all four legs to support your deterministic fatalism, when in fact it does no such thing.

Your analogy is rediculous! Providing a "pardon" and performing an act of CREATION are not analogous at all. The more appropriate analogy is how does the will play a role making the "blind" man see! That requires an act of God which no man can "will"!

The grounds of salvation..... Because the will of man does nothing to create the notion of salvation, nor does it in any way determine or create the necessary atonement needed for salvation

Another complete distortion! We are not discussing the broader concept of "salvation" but the narrower aspect of "regeneration." John 1:13 is speaking directly of the role of the "will" in regard to being "born OF." The human will plays absolutely no part the producing "OF" new birth because man is PASSIVE in causing the new birth this is His "WORKmanship" not ours as it is a CREATIVE act of God. "Of his OWN WILL begat he us by the word of truth" - James 1:18 and "when it PLEASED GOD..he reveal his Son in us" this is the creative work of God likened unto Genesis 1:3. Previously we loved DARKNESS but this creative act of God produced LIGHT (2 Cor. 4:6) and thus a new heart which in turn is logically manifested in the consequence of "WITH THE HEART man beleiveth unto righteousness."

 

[The Biblicist]

Absolutely nothing prevents the salvation of the worst of sinners but their own love of darkness and willful resistance to light that is presented in nature, in the gospel and in the providence of God.

Absolutely nothing obtains salvation but the grace of God in spite of the love of darkness and willful resistance to light in the "cheif of sinners."


Election "to salvation" rests upon the logical premise that the whole of humanity has fallen into sin and is thereby justly fitted unto destruction and only the "mercy" of God saves any of Adam's fallen race:

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

 

[The Biblicist]

Absolutely nothing prevents the salvation of the worst of sinners but their own love of darkness and willful resistance to light that is presented in nature, in the gospel and in the providence of God.

Absolutely nothing obtains salvation but the grace of God in spite of the love of darkness and willful resistance to light in the "cheif of sinners."


Election "to salvation" rests upon the logical premise that the whole of humanity has fallen into sin and is thereby justly fitted unto destruction and only the "mercy" of God saves any of Adam's fallen race:

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

The phrase "with the heart man believeth" proves that the human will is inseparable from the heart and is merely the expression of the heart.

The fact that Jesus says that the lost man LOVES darkness and HATES the light as the reason he "WILL NOT" come to the light also proves in the lost man the will is inseparable from the heart and is merely the expression of the heart and thus the servant of the heart.

The fact that it is impossible for God to will anything contrary to what is righteouness or the state of this own heart proves the will of God is inseparable from His own heart and is but the vehicle of expression of his own heart and thus a servant of His own heart.

However, your position is that the will has an independent existence from the heart of man and God and may act independent from the condition of the heart toward light and darkness! Jesus says that the heart that loves darkness and hates light "WILL NOT" come to light but you say it can!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist, when in the regeneration process/bullet hole analogy, does a sinner have the ability to resist Gods causing him to repent and believe? When is a sinners able to do something other than sin? Tell us what part of Calvinism would you say you disagree with? I can see absolutely no reason you would disagree with any point of the five period.

 

[The Biblicist]

Biblicist, when in the regeneration process/bullet hole analogy, does a sinner have the ability to resist Gods causing him to repent and believe?

You are still failing to understand what I said. Let me break it down as simple and as clear as I possibly can.

There is a transition point when the old heart is removed and the new heart is given. In both cases there is no external coercion as man operates freely according to the heart he has. Prior to being given a new heart (regeneration) he acts freely according to the heart he has. Upon receiving the new heart he acts freely according to that new heart "with the heart man beleiveth."

Hence, at no time is he forced against his will to resist or repent. As long as he has the old heart (unregenerated state) he freely loves darkness and hates light and freely "WILL NOT COME TO THE LIGHT."

Upon reception of the new heart, he freely now loves light and hates darkness and therefore freely repents and believes "with the heart man believeth."

The new heart is the CAUSE and "with the heart man believeth" is the CONSEQUENCE but done FREELY according to the dictates of his own heart, in this case a NEW heart.

When is a sinners able to do something other than sin?

We are "created in Christ Jesus UNTO good works" - Ephes. 2:10. In context that new creation is identified as quickening (vv. 1,5,10). Hence, choosing to do "good works" follows rather than precedes being "created in Christ Jesus" as the very grammar demands "created in Christ Jesus UNTO good works."

Moreover that divine quickening is inseparable from faith ("through faith") in regard to CHRONOLOGY as the perfect tense looks at a COMPLETED ACTION in the past that continues as a completed state. However, logically faith is the consequence of the new heart created in "true holiness and righteousness" (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3;10).

Tell us what part of Calvinism would you say you disagree with? I can see absolutely no reason you would disagree with any point of the five period.

I would disagree with the unbiblical descriptions and how they are interpreted by Calvinists and I would deny being a Calvinists as I take my training from Paul not John Calvin as I have never studied John Calvin or Augustine's works.

I beleive in "Definite atonement" rather than "limited" atonement as the term "limited" does not rightly convey the Biblical teaching as there are universal aspects of the atonement that include mankind and creation.

I would reject "preservation of saving faith" not "perseverance of the saints" in some defined standard of good works.

I would reject "irresistable" grace but prefer "effectual" grace as the "grace" of God in regard to some aspects is resisted by all men before and after salvation but is always effectual in accomplishing God's design in each case.

 

[savedbymercy]

bib

Moreover that divine quickening is inseparable from faith ("through faith")

Thats False. Faith is a result and fruit of quickening. It nowhere says that one is quickened through Faith, and that is exactly what this statement of yours implies..

David says Quicken us [The Church], and then we shall call upon thy Name ! Ps80:18

So will not we go back from thee: quicken us [The Church], and we will call[In Faith] upon thy name.

No quickening, no Faith ! Life will always be before activity..

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist, no one acts freely that is bound to only one possible consequent for any given antecedent. Freely implies being able to do something other than what one does under the very same set of circumstances. The 'freely' you speak of is not freedom in any sense of the word, but is the sheer results of force or coercion in one singular direction, which in the case of a sinner, would be to sin and that continually. In such a state with the will bound to sin and that by necessity, it is logically impossible for such a sinner to choose life, because that would go against the coercion of his nature.

I see your solution to this necessitated state of sin as being God regenerating the heart to be able to accept His gift. The point i am asking about is how does a regenerated heart reject the offer once regenerated? If regeneration includes or is simultaneous with repentance and faith as I believe you have presented it, in essence you would have one falling from the grace received....... or does initial regeneration not include repentance and faith, or does regeneration not involve God's grace in salvation? Also, would you explain to us the distinction between regeneration and salvations offer? At times I see you speaking as if though when one takes place the other does as well, and at other times you appear to make distinctions between the two.

 

[JesusFan]

The sheer ignorance of many of the rank and file members in churches today on theological issues amazes me. I cannot tell you how many individuals that I have conversed with over the years look at me like I fell off of a banana boat when I try to explain to them some basic notions of Calvinistic theology, such as deals with repentance and faith. I might say, Calvinism teaches that men repent and believe because they have been regenerated first by the Holy Spirit...or according to Calvinistic thought, or that Calvinism teaches that dead men have no wills and make no choices, and that in order to be saved God must first regenerate their souls. Man cannot even repent or have faith until God regenerates them making repentance and faith possible. Both repentance and faith come subsequent to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit according to Calvinism. According to Calvinism, unsaved men are painted as dead logs floating down a stream, unable to repent or exercise faith until God first regenerates a chosen few, Such regeneration in reality took place before the foundations of the world on the behalf of the elect, and salvation is in reality when the individual first comes to the knowledge that they are one of the lucky ones ordained to eternal life. Salvation is not so much of them making a change of heart in repentance and faith, but rather of coming to the realization that from the foundation of the world they were chosen by God to salvation. Sound familiar? Is anyone listening to those like Biblicist as they spew this theology/philosophy at almost every juncture? Where is the cry from those not desiring to be labeled as 'Calvinistic'

The responses I have received are astounding. I hear things like, "my pastor doesn't say that," or "they don't believe or teach that in my church, or " I don't believe that." when I know for fact those things lie precisely behind the teachings they are sitting under, having been there and listened myself. The rank and file simply picks up on a few talking points like OSAS, my works have nothing to do with my faith, or nothing we do has any effect upon my eternal salvation, etc.

The pastors and teachers for the most part have a clearer understanding of their positions, but the amazing thing is this. They also know full well the further they teach in opposition to their basic theology, and emphasize and teach personal responsibility, the more results they have. So even holding onto Calvinistic error in their basic theology, they stray from that rigid system of confusion to instigate results in their parishioners. You will often hear, "You need to repent." or "You need to exercise faith" all the while honestly believing neither are conditions for salvation, and both will either by NECESSITY take place as a result of arbitrary selection involving regeneration by God alone, .... or they were simply never chosen to be regenerated in the first place.


And so on and so on the maelstrom of confusion is propagated service by service. Come on. Be honest and say Amen!

Disagree? Then let's see you counter the clear Calvinistic notions being presented by Biblicist/ (Dr. Walter?)

Do you hold that ONLY calvinism is the theological system to understand scriptures by then?
that non cals/arminian theologies are ALL bad, period?

You do know God has and still does use in mughty fashions individuals/groups holding to either sides of this?

My view is that Cal is BEST way to come to scriptures as regarding Sotierology, NOT though only way, as other systems are good, just incomplete, especially in regards to salvation model...

Do you hold calvinism IS the Gospel, not jusyt a better way to understand it?