Featured "Targeting" and Soteriology

You can't learn to love neighbor, without trying and failing to learn. Gal 5:6, theology isn't important but faith working through love.

And WORKS are what teack you a closer relationship with God, not prayer contemplation etc... Which is not to say avoid the examples you gave either. They are all necessities, but scriptures teach, knowledge puffs up, works build up.

 

I understand that logically Calvinism is vitality dependent on strict determinism to uphold all 5 points of the TULIP.

You are projecting that God “sovereignly predetermines” that some are unable to respond but that does not nullify the free offer?

IOW’s God calls all men to repeat but doesn’t give all of them the ability to do so? How exactly is that a genuine offer again, I must have missed something here?!?

God is not a respecter of persons and the scripture is also clear that He is Just in His judgment which is His way and that He does this in “truth”.

He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
(Deu 32:4)

All men fall short of righteousness through sin. If all men are not given a genuine opportunity to respond to His calling (John 12:32) exactly what are they judged on again? Being predetermined to not be able to respond?

Now back to my premise: “all His ways are judgment”, “in truth” and “Just” but your argument would have to conclude He is partial to giving some rules they have no possibility to follow because they were not specially pre-selected? Then He judges them on their inability to be able respond to the offer? And this divine judgment is in truth and just how?

Seems to me your view of God’s judgment is that it is rigged, an illusion amounting to meanless offer because all has been pre-determined. I fail to see that type of judgment being consistent with the Nature and attributes of God’s being in which He created the world in Love (His work is perfect) (Duet 32:4, Gen 1:31, John 3:16). Simply, there can be no “true’ judgment without creaturely volition and the responsibility to accept the gift of grace or not in “truth”. The only avenue you have left is to claim partiality based on His predeterminations which leaves most of His creation without any “true” hope.

The rest of your post is a mere attempt to proof-text creature inability to fit the determinist doctrine which all your interpretations have been debated and not here to re-chase those rabbits. It does not help to help your argument to further try to suggest the scriptures declare inability anyway. The pont I am making is that your interpretation do not comform to God's way according to the scriptures: Deut 32:4. It seems you do not understand where your own doctrine logically leads. Again, the premise is that all God’s ways are judgment, in truth and are just.
You need to make up your mind:

Either (A) God has sovereignly pre-determined the choice of man whereby he can not do other than he was predestined…The offer is not real.

Or (B) God sovereignly designed men with the volition to respond and to be responsible for their actions...The offer is genuine.

If (A) Please explain how it can be “truth” that all God’s ways are judgment if it is true that are all men are pre-determined to respond as He precisely programmed them? How does God judge His creatures based on what He Himself is responsible for? How is His gracious offer of mercy genuinely applicable in “truth” before judgment if it is only through sovereign determinate action placed upon the creature according to the Calvinist/Determinist Doctrines of the as projected by the TULIP?

If (B) Free will should be defined as volition and this sustains the meaning that a creature has the ability to consciously choose; one can not do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense. If creaturely response is determined by causal means to have an irresistible effect on the creature then creaturely volition logically becomes void.


(B) Is the only way that God’s judgment is in truth and just. Duet 32:4 is clear and there is no logical way the Doctrine of Pre-selected Deterministic Grace/Calvinism can can hold to that “truth”.

Concerning Deut 32:4 the Determinist Doctrines of Pre-selected Grace do not have a leg to stand on because they cannot maintain truth in God's judgment being His way because all points of the TULIP simply and logically deny the creature's responsibility.

 

Benjamin posted...

I agree 100%.

The teachings and *explanations* that many of the Calvinists propogate on here discribe a *god* that would be, to put it bluntly....an INSANE God.

 

Their presentation of God is He is a fascist, or terrorist. If you don't believe like I want you to, I will fly a plane into you and make it burn forever.....

 

No. God will not fly a plane into you. If you do not believe in the Son your end will be the lake of fire for eternity. That is a lot worse than "flying a plane into you."

 

Thank you, Ben, for your reply to mine. Obviously we are in substantial disagreement, but I like the way you communicate and frame your arguments.

 

Scripturally,not just logically.

As far as predetermining, some Calvinists do and some do not. I assume you are knowledgeable about lapsarianism, infralapsarianism, and supralapsarianism? I would fall into the suprlapsarian camp; God sovereignly chooses those whom He will save and those whom He will not.

As far as the free offer of the gospel, it is true that the Gospel is freely offered. I am not a hyper-Calvinist. I believe in preaching the Gospel to all who will listen, both inside and outside the walls of the church. Are all going to respond positively to the message? Sadly, no. Are all capable of responding to the message? Sadly, no. Do I (or anyone else for that matter) know who will respond and who is capable? Happily, no! That is why I can preach it boldly, because it is God who calls His elect. The only pressure I have is the imperative to peach it.

It is the Gospel that is genuine and free, not every person's ability to respond.

No doubt.

Amen.

Men are sinners for two reasons. 1. They are born in sin (original sin). 2. They sin. What you are missing in your appeal to the "genuine opportunity" is that all men are not given a genuine opportunity according to your definition. What do you say to the tribal person who will never hear the Gospel in his/her lifetime? If you say that God will judge them on the light that they live up to then you have emasculated Rom. 1:16. Of course, you can go the route of Clark Pinnock's Open Theism, but I pray to God you do not advocate that teaching.

Man's ability or inability does not nullify the commands of God. The command is there, "Be holy as I am holy." Can every person be holy? No. Are they commanded to be holy? Yes. Acts 17:30 calls on all men everywhere to repent. Will all repent? No. Are they exonerated if they do not repent? No. God judges the sinner not on his ability or inability but on the fact that they are sinners. Man is a sinner by nature as well as choice. Rom. 9:22 posits the idea that God tolerates the condemned for the sake of the elect.

This is simply a theological fact. But I feel compelled to bring it down to a practical level. When I preach I do not say to the congregation, "This message is only for God's elect. The rest of you tune out." I echo the words of Paul, "Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:20). Calvinist preachers do not worry about who the elect are, they are consumed with preaching the message that calls the elect.

Obviously I disagree, but your response is logical given your assumption.

I already explained what I logically believe. Do you know where your theology leads you? It leads you to a limited God who cooperates with man in salvation. It is the doctrine of semi-Pelagianism.

The rest of your post continues along this vein, and while I appreciate your response, you have already made your point.

Blessings.

 

Ezekiel 3 :
18 When I say to a wicked man, ‘You will surely die, ’ and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for[Or in; also in verses 19 and 20] his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 19 But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself.

20 “Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before him, he will die. Since you did not warn him, he will die for his sin. The righteous things he did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 21 But if you do warn the righteous man not to sin and he does not sin, he will surely live because he took warning, and you will have saved yourself. ”

Ezekiel 33 :
8 When I say to the wicked, ‘O wicked man, you will surely die, ’ and you do not speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for[Or in; also in verse 9] his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but you will have saved yourself.

10 “Son of man, say to the house of Israel, ‘This is what you are saying: “Our offenses and sins weigh us down, and we are wasting away because of[Or away in] them. How then can we live? ”’ 11 Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?’

12 “Therefore, son of man, say to your countrymen, ‘The righteousness of the righteous man will not save him when he disobeys, and the wickedness of the wicked man will not cause him to fall when he turns from it. The righteous man, if he sins, will not be allowed to live because of his former righteousness.’ 13 If I tell the righteous man that he will surely live, but then he trusts in his righteousness and does evil, none of the righteous things he has done will be remembered; he will die for the evil he has done. 14 And if I say to the wicked man, ‘You will surely die,’ but he then turns away from his sin and does what is just and right— 15 if he gives back what he took in pledge for a loan, returns what he has stolen, follows the decrees that give life, and does no evil, he will surely live; he will not die. 16 None of the sins he has committed will be remembered against him. He has done what is just and right; he will surely live.

17 “Yet your countrymen say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ But it is their way that is not just. 18 If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, he will die for it. 19 And if a wicked man turns away from his wickedness and does what is just and right, he will live by doing so. 20 Yet, O house of Israel, you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ But I will judge each of you according to his own ways.”

James 5 :
19 My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, 20 remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

James 3:
3 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

Mark 16 :
15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Acts 1:8
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

1 Timothy 1:15
Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.

2 Corinthians 5 :
16 So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

Paul life is an example of why he preached what he did, to send us out for they will not come to us. We go to them.

 

Really?

The word you need to grok is METAPHOR!

Looking for crayon font here....

The terrorists said, You won't believe what we do, you are against us, we will fly a plane and kill innocent people.

This view of God says, I made you like you are, you can't help but sin, if you don't dance through my hoops, I will kill you, or make you suffer for eternity.

fas·cism   /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
www.dictionary.com

So, were you joking, or were you really thinking you were making an argument?

Or was it just an attempt to belittle me?

 

.

What do you think BELIEVE IN HIM means?

And you were trying to belittle me. I should get snotty right back, but, frankly, the petty posturing is boresome.

There is ONE THING that is the ultimate determinant if you are going to be in the resurrection or not. It's not claiming Jesus is Lord. It's getting the LOVE RIGHT.

If you believe, which is not the same as reasoning and not the same as proclaiming with your mouth, then you will have the love right.

You can't make an empty claim to believe, and then declare the love must be right, the LOVE is the determining factor. Most folks have no idea the breadth of the word Agapao.

 

Morseop....Men are sinners for two reasons. 1. They are born in sin (original sin). 2. They sin. What you are missing in your appeal to the "genuine opportunity" is that all men are not given a genuine opportunity according to your definition. What do you say to the tribal person who will never hear the Gospel in his/her lifetime? If you say that God will judge them on the light that they live up to then you have emasculated Rom. 1:16. Of course, you can go the route of Clark Pinnock's Open Theism, but I pray to God you do not advocate that teaching.
<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>

There is no place in scripture that says you will sin forever. You may be born in sin, and you may sin, but nothing says you will continue to sin forever anywhere in the bible. You are practically idolizing Sin.

 

Call it what you will. I don’t limit the definition of “hyper-Calvinism” to whether the Determinist admits or not they preach a message of salvation to all or not. Believing in strict determinism amounts to a belief that some men have no hope because they not specially pre-selected to be predestined unto salvation.

In order to “truthfully” preach a gospel with such an understanding the Calvinist would have to include the possibility of no hope in his message. Otherwise he is like a parent who is putting his child to bed who lies to him, telling him that Jesus loves him, when instead he should be telling his child that hopes he is one of the specially pre-selected few.

I find no credibility in one claiming he is not a hyper-Calvinist based on that he holds back, or outright lies about the deterministic factors he believes are behind the ability for one to actually accept that offer. It is like walking into a room full of people and preaching supposedly “good news” to all while knowing it is only “true” for a specially pre-selected few. Deceit does not excuse the Calvinist from my definition of hyper-determinism.

Why not be “genuine” yourself then and include that inability aspect in your message? It is amazing to me that the Calvinist takes his ideas of genuineness and relates that to the attributes of a Loving, Merciful, Gracious and Holy God who has declared unto the world a “sincere” message of hope for all. I see a huge difference between the Nature in which God delivers the “Good News” to the creatures in world He created and that of the nature of the Calvinists’ message, thankfully!

I have nothing to be ashamed of when preaching as “I” have nothing to hide when preaching the Gospel (i.e. determinism).

I hope you are not under the illsuion that these types of replies are logical, because it seems that way. Your fallacious attempt to form a “false dilemma” of Open Theism and added fallacious rhetorical ploy of “argument from sympathy” is noted and considered not only “begging the question” but disingenuous in that I believe you know better than to make that accusation, FWIW.

Once again you have avoided my premise concerning the “truth” that all God’s ways are judgment in truth and are just. Rom 9:22 in no way discards or takes away from the truth of Deut 32:4:

You need to make up your mind:

Either (A) God has sovereignly pre-determined the choice of man whereby he can not do other than he was predestined…The offer is not real.

Or (B) God sovereignly designed men with the volition to respond and to be responsible for their actions...The offer is genuine.

If (A) Please explain how it can be “truth” that all God’s ways are judgment if it is true that are all men are pre-determined to respond as He precisely programmed them? How does God judge His creatures based on what He Himself is responsible for? How is His gracious offer of mercy genuinely applicable in “truth” before judgment if it is only through sovereign determinate action placed upon the creature according to the Calvinist/Determinist Doctrines of the as projected by the TULIP?

If (B) Free will should be defined as volition and this sustains the meaning that a creature has the ability to consciously choose; one can not do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense. If creaturely response is determined by causal means to have an irresistible effect on the creature then creaturely volition logically becomes void.


(B) Is the only way that God’s judgment is in truth and just. Duet 32:4 is clear and there is no logical way the Doctrine of Pre-selected Deterministic Grace/Calvinism can can hold to that “truth”.

Concerning Deut 32:4 the Determinist Doctrines of Pre-selected Grace do not have a leg to stand on because they cannot maintain truth in God's judgment being His way because all points of the TULIP simply and logically deny the creature's responsibility.

Your "fact" amounts to nothing more than question begging and your “level of practicality” is filled with non-discloser (of which another word for that kind message is “deceit”), nor is it logic.

Why not speak the “whole truth” then? Are you ashamed??? (Rom 1:16)

“Logic” philosophically speaking, is a science to draw out the truth in a matter and since you have not shown my "assumption" to be incorrect your disagreement has no leg to stand on.

Your “logic” has failed to show any validity in refuting my claim whatsoever as far as I can see.

Another futile fallacious attempt? Only this time to form a “false dilemma” of Semi-Pelagianism?!? Again, FWIW, these types of fallacious rhetorical ploys are merely seen by me as a disingenuous attempt to begin down the road of a strawman and to avoid the claims and issues in the premise at hand.

Yes indeed, and my point that “all God’s ways are judgment, in truth”, which excludes the determinists’ doctrinal interpretations of inability, stands un-refuted by any truly logical means.

I also appreciate your response, but the vien of your posts seem to be requiring me to continually break out the nets to get you to directly address the premise with some credible logic.

Blessing to you.

 

Catalyst posted...

I read some of Clark Pinnock a while back and it was just excellant. As I recall it was firmly evangelical, with a strong emphasis on Gods grace. (any good book on christian living, or theology should be strong on grace, of course.)

I sure hope he didnt go bad.

 

Errr, that wasn't my comment. You'll have to ask them. I dont' read those types of books.

 

A1C,

He did. Unfortunately, he did.

Pinnock was one of the leading advocates of Open Theism. One of OT's main tenets is that God will offer those who die in their sins a second chance at salvation after death. It is a rather complicated theology and does interpretative gymnastics that would make Mary Lou Retton envious. Greg Boyd is another advocate of OT.

OT is, at its root, a denial of God's omniscience. We are seeing the denial of God's omniscience in some currently active threads. It is a dangerous doctrine that reduces God to man's level, or man up to God's level, depending on how you want to view it. OT is mocked by the prophet Isaiah:

Isaiah 46:9-11 9 "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure'; 11 Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it. "​

 

Catalyst,

That God has revealed that he has indeed done this very thing is not at all
"silly" as you say. All was necessary to set the stage of redemption to unfold.

No...electing is God's choice. Foreknowledge is Him knowing His elect before the creation. This is straight forward language...not anthropomorhisms.

.

It might be that you have not looked carefully at these teachings yet.The teaching and language is direct and biblical language.

This tells me you have not read any from the mainstream teaching as they always highlight God in their teaching.

It does not seem that you have actually heard or read the teaching.

 

Iconoclast posted...

Well, of course Calvinism uses the correct "biblical language". Nobody has any issue in that area.

The problem is the exceedingly bad doctrines and false teachings that calvinism stuffs into the "biblical language".

It would be like handing someone a candy bar..(looks great!)..but its stuffed with arsenic.

 

On my phone, sorry for sloppy. I will be after the ===


Catalyst,

Quote: There is an inherent dilemma when someone writes doctrine off of anthropomorphisms. Referring to GOD who existed before time, as making a choice in a linear time frame, before, during, after, are examples, is pretty silly.

That God has revealed that he has indeed done this very thing is not at all "silly" as you say. All was necessary to set the stage of redemption to unfold.

====you are so quick to defend a person's doctrine that had to murder people to get it to stick that you failed to notice your comment has nothing to do with what I posted. What I said was silly was using anthropomorphisms to write doctrine on. It would be like writing doctrine around heaven having actual gold streets. ====

Quote: The verses talking about GOD electing people, is merely indicating He knew before.

No...electing is God's choice. Foreknowledge is Him knowing His elect before the creation. This is straight forward language...not anthropomorhisms.

====no, its exactly like I said. At least put up an argument to support your proclamations, just saying No and stating your feelings isn't an argument, its an insult.=====

Quote: The electing, called, etc, calvinistic teachings try to put the terms in Human perspective, when they are anthropomorphisms

.

It might be that you have not looked carefully at these teachings yet.The teaching and language is direct and biblical language.

====it might be said, you need to look up anthropomorphism, nt argue strawmen, and show me where I am wrong in the scriptures, not just repeat I am wrong. Any idea how disrespectful it is to be told with no reason that you are wrong? I didn't let my parents pull that on me without a why, I'm not going to let a man I don't know presume they are right and expect me to just bow over and say, ok. Its a debate board, right? The soapbox and proclamation rooms are down the hall on the far left.=====

Quote: Not only that they put the PERSON as the topic not the God. None of the terms describe GOD'S mind on who is called.

This tells me you have not read any from the mainstream teaching as they always highlight God in their teaching.

=====this tells me you have no argument, you just like to stick your finger in and stir things up. ====

Quote: It's the best words the authors have. They were reaching to describe it. Like talking colors with a blind man there just aren't words, so you use the best you can. Now, when you take words, used to give a rough idea of God's perspective to man, and try to make GOD fit within those words which were inadequate to begin with, you end up with a doctrine that you have to kill people to make it stick.

It's really, rather, sickening.

It does not seem that you have actually heard or read the teaching.

=====don't address me again, if you are just going to espouse your MORE RIGHTNESS, and not give explanations. You have not earned any right, respect, or title to expect the world to believe you on carte blanche faux authoritative statements. I'm not being petty here, but its hard for me to not be as rude back to you, as that vast disrespect was to me.

 

AIC,

Your posting has turned very strange.Back up what you say or stop saying it.
Quote some real calvinist and show the arsenic. Quote them and show the error. I will make it simple for you..here is the 1689///show the error

http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

 

Tell you what, you did the proclamation with no argument or substantion first. He might follow your lead, so YOU GO THERE FIRST. You are pretty brazen to jump him for something you just did 5x worse.