Featured The Fear of Calvinism in the SBC

So you admit to doing it above within this thread, now you need shown where you've done this? You admitted to being extreme in your slander about them, but now need a guide to see it? Or, was your broad brush denigration, personal unproveable allegations (by your own admission) of Calvinists 'unintentional'? :laugh: :laugh:

 

There's your John Wesley concern directed at me, you know, the one you now pretend never took place. Losing 'confidence' in you at an alarming rate. Hey perhaps you should be locked in a cage with them until you lose your chicanery? I'm thinking the affirmative on that one. :thumbs:


Oh. here was your first evidence in your 'Wesley debacle'

Get some real proof. For once.

 

So you're going ad hominem now. The whole conversation of ours entailed your negative slander of Cals. This isn't seen by you only within this thread, it is one of your traits on BB.

That's another story altogether and has nothing to do with this conversation. For your question yet again, I've already answered you.

 

Then I am to assume from your answer that you do believe in the DOCTRINE of Radical Depravity & Total Inability....IE men are dead in sin which means that since the fall man rests under the curse of sin and is wholly unable to love God or do anything meriting salvation.

If so, how can you make the claim against Calvinists who object to any Human Responsibility in salvation?

 

Here's what you said:

Now it is a given that your second sentence above is jumbled a bit. Of course I wouldn't object when Arminianism is being presented as flawed, because it is flawed, nor would I allow you to broad brush the reformed as you have done.

What I see you saying is where was I when arminianism was being broad brushed. The only thing you provided was a link wherein I spoke of how Arminianism (todays brand esp) has sin, man, and God wrong.

But again your sentence is incoherent and jumbled and I see no connection to it and the link to my statement.

I take it like this (your quote above) that I should be balanced and should have objected to Arminianism being denigrated and should have used Wesley as an example of Armininanism being 'of God'.

Later on you said doing so was standing in the way of God:

I am against all error, including Arminian error, even if some of its proponents hold sentimental value in your mind.

I will tell you this, I am no fan of Wesley, of the way he treated Whitefield, and I'm not real huge on the manifestations at his meetings of persons losing control of themselves. I also object to the free will choice error promoted in all systems of the same ilk.

 

But belief is only according to the power of God, not the inherent ability of man, nor because of any choice man has made by belief. It is not not a determinitive choice of man (literally) but rather faith is evidence of salvation, not a cause. Thus the elect can only believe.

When you say man still has to believe ('Men still have to believe' -- implying doing), that language makes his faith the cause of his salvation, and also makes salvation a reward for said action.

 

Thats right & why the starting point for any system of doctrine has to be the greater glory of God. This is why, in and of themselves, the Five Points are not the heart of Calvinism; rather they simply serve to explain distinctive aspects of Salvation Theology (soteriology).

However, all 5 points do flow from the heart of Calvinism & Calvinistic beliefs which holds thoroughly to a passion for God's glory. You will note that each doctrine draws attention away from what human beings can accomplish, in order to declare, "Salvation is of the Lord" --Jonah 2:9.

 

We believe we are saved by grace through faith as well. But that faith is God's gift as is proven by Scripture Php. 1:13, Rom 10:17; Romans 12:3; 1 Cor. 4:7; 1 Corinthians 1:22ff and the faith we have is only by the power of God, not ourselves, see Eph. 1:19 carefully. From your viewpoint it is apparently something a person must do, some inherent ability to say you believe or make a decision, and at that point the reward is given. Think it through as that is its logical conclusion.

:thumbs:

Yes, which is why God gave this faith or power to believe. The same power that rose up Christ from the dead.

Yes, grace and faith are inseparable acts of God upon His elect whom He has chosen to salvation. These are also inseparable from predestination, election, calling, justification, sanctification, glorification.

 

I see. I don't think the passage you use (The Philippian jailer/Acts16:31) is as cut and dried as many believe. It is not saying 'do' this and you'll be saved. If so, then man gets glory and it is works based. It is way beyond that so we must examine it and not accept this as a precursor to easy-believism. Rather than all that this 'believe and you will be saved' causes an inward work upon the elect. Some have heard this call to believe, and realized they cannot or do not and have called out to God for mercy and He changed them and regenerated them inwardly, thus they became believers by His power which is always the case.

It is he who asked the question, 'what must I do'? so we cannot base a theology on that and say 'see, you must do this, and when you do this you'll be saved'. It is deeper than that.

The answer of course was he must be a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, and if this be true, that is, that he finds himself a believer, then he will in fact realize salvation. But he knew all that belief entailed that he could possibly know at that point as he saw these men, Paul and Silas suffering persecution, imprisonment, singing in the midst of possible impending death. He saw them as true believers. He could not have gotten it all wrong by seeing their statement as 'easy-believism'. He did not see it as this at all, he knew the price to be paid.

The faith he recognized in the Son of God was not his own ability, but as the Lord opened his heart causing him to have a heart of flesh, and causing him to walk in His ways, Ez. 36:26-27. Then he can honestly say yes, I believe, and God gets all the glory.

 

Amen! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

1) First, if faith in Christ is instilled via irresistible grace, we are saved by grace and given faith. Not how it reads. To be saved through faith, means our faith existed before we were saved, like entering a room full of grace through a door made of faith. We go through the door to gain access to the grace in which we stand, Romans 5:2.

2) Philippians 1:13-14 refers to "brethren trusting in the Lord because of my imprisonment (or trusting because of my bonds)." No support whatsoever for trusting because of irresistible grace. Yet listed as if it did. So a disingenuous reference.

3) Romans 10:17 says faith comes from hearing, not from irresistible grace. Two for two, no support whatsoever for "the gift of faith." Second disingenuous reference.

4) Romans 12:3, at least mentions something that could be misinterpreted as the gift of faith. The verse says we are allotted "a measure of faith." .” What is asserted is that this measure of faith is allotted before salvation and is the means of salvation. But lets look at the context and see if we can figure out what Paul is actually saying. Each one of us, who is saved and indwelt with the Holy Spirit is gifted to build up the body of Christ. But we are not all given all the same gifts, for some are teachers, and some are leaders and some are servants. Each has been allotted a measure, a sphere of influence, an area of calling so that together we can build up the body of believers until we all attain the unity of faith, which is to be Christ-like. So rather than pre-salvation faith, the idea is our post salvation Holy Calling. Although mistaken, at least this verse could be construed to support irresistible grace.

5) 1 Corinthians 4:7 says everything we have, including our faith, we received. But it does not say or suggest we received faith by irresistible grace. Since faith comes from hearing the word of God, we received our faith through the call of the gospel. So we now have 3 or 4 disingenuous references that provide no support whatsoever for irresistible grace.

6) 1 Corinthians 1:22, here the idea, not in the verse but in the passage is that is that gospel is foolishness or a stumbling block to those that do not believe. Again, it does not say nor suggest those who believed were altered supernaturally by irresistible grace.

Bottom line: Four references are non-germane, and one provides an ambiguous phrase that Calvinism misinterprets. Go figure.

BTW, Ephesians 1:19, read any which way including "carefully" says the power working in and through us who believe is the same power that raised Christ from the dead. Again, no support for irresistible grace giving us faith before we are placed "in Christ." None, zip, nada.