Featured The 5 Points that lead me out of Calvinism

In my quote of you

In your quote of you

When you say "sovereign over evil" do you mean He commands it? ordains? or that He permits it?

What about when He laments the evil saying "what more could I have done that I have not done" ???

And "why will you die? turn to Me and live" ???

in Christ,

Bob

 

Speaking of God not ordaining the evil of rejecting the Gospel --



[FONT=&quot]“He CAME to HIS OWN and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]His OWN received Him not[/FONT][FONT=&quot]” John 1[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Matt 23[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]37“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]38“Behold, your house is being left to you desolate![/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Luke 7[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]28 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]When all the people and the tax collectors heard this, they acknowledged God’s justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]29 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Is 5:4[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Response: [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Well the Calvinist would have an answer for God's question on that one. An answer contrived via “extreme inference” in places like Deut 5:29. Calvinism would inform the world – and God Himself of just what God did to cause the lamentable result that God is complaining about in t[FONT=&quot]he verse above[/FONT].

[FONT=&quot]I[FONT=&quot]n Calvinism i[/FONT][/FONT]f the result is wrong if it is to be lamented if the question [FONT=&quot]is to be asked "What more could have been done" w[FONT=&quot]ell [/FONT][/FONT]then Calvinism argues He [FONT=&quot]knows exactly what He failed to do [/FONT] - [FONT=&quot]in effect [/FONT] sabotaging His own plans - the cause of His own "lament" - or at the very least - being forgetful to "do the necessary" as the saying goes in India.[/FONT]

 

I believe that the Truths of Tulip, what they represent, are nothing short of the proclaiming the Truths of the Gospel of God's Grace and Why ! I believe therefore to reject them is equally rejecting the Gospel of God's Grace in Christ !

 

I am glad you cleared that up:thumbs:

Been in this forum long enough to pinpoint those who really make an effort to pigeon hole those of us who see DOG as scriptural, as being Absolute Predestination Believers.....which is quite untrue.

Seriously these guys need the Bible when it comes to predestination which only lines out the regeneration portion of salvation......not every stinking move you make. You know, its just a total misrepresentation of DOCTRINES OF GRACE theology.

 

Skan asked for Scripture. I have presented Scripture which he chooses to ignore. I made the same point regarding omnipotence and sovereignty that Archangel made, though not as eloquently, yet Skan ignores. Perhaps I am on his ignore list!

 

....or maybe you are predestined to not be addressed!:smilewinkgrin:

 

The problem is with the definition of terms. By assuming that if God sovereignly decides choice "B" then he is less sovereign - you are making an assumption that is not necessarily a "given".

 

When you say "sovereign over evil" do you mean He merely permits it?

What about when He laments the evil that is done in rejecting the Gospel by saying "what more could I have done that I have not done" ???

And "why will you die? turn to Me and live" ???

 

No doubt you are correct even if Skan does not believe in predestination! Then regardless of what Skan believes God is Sovereign and He is eternally Sovereign.

That being said Skan should address the Scripture whether he addresses me or not. The Scripture is the definitive factor; not my opinion, not his opinion!

 

And all this stuff coming from a VA Tech grad.....Old Schooler, Senior Citizen ....... brother, I'm impressed:love2:

 

Exactly. It is painfully obvious that the opposition to Skan's view being presented here has been merely question begging the definition of "Divine Sovereignty" to be Deterministic Sovereignty - then with blinders on that another definition is being offered or could exist they are dancing around the "issue" (defining terms) with the usual.

It is comical though watching the ole typical standby comebacks of: “deeply troubling”, “contrary to scripture”, “has no clue what “Reformed Theology” teaches”, “resembles the RCC line of thought”, ...and of course the personal insults begin: “the typical Arminian ignorance and arrogance”, and finally the rhetorical, “nobody cares", "moved away from solid theology", "something must be wrong with the guy” arguments, followed by the ole thumbs ups,… (And that was just on the first page and a half ) :laugh:

…YET no one, NOT ONE “Calvinist” has bothered to look past his Deterministic view of Divine Sovereignty (question begging) and actually address the full premise of the argument which deals with the false idea of divine deterministic sovereign control from eternity.

 

Compatibilist Calvinist logic (classic question begging) attempting to defend Deterministic Sovereignty while supposedly maintaining free will as to avoid theological fatalism:

Bill C: “God determined all things that ever happen from eternity, He is Sovereign."

Bob A: "Did God determine the things Jeffrey Dahmer did?"

Bill C: "No, Jeffrey Dahmer did what he did because of his nature."

Bob A: "Who determined Jeffrey Dahmer’s nature?"

Bill C: "God did, He determines all things, He is Sovereign."

 

Continuation of conversation:

Bob A.: "How can it be that God determined Dahmer's nature, Dahmer is a slave to his nature, yet God is not responsible?"

Bill C.: "It's a mystery."

 

Repeated post....see below

 

This fallacy creates two extreme views and presumes that no other alternatives are available. In this case either people must agree that every act of faith and obedience is divinely and irresistibly predestinated with God directly causing by specific predestination any cognitive participation of the believer’s will or conscience, or they must hold that acts of the believer’s faith and obedience are wholly independent of God and wholly prompted by the believer’s will.

Much more to this that needs to be considered

 

You got one thing correct: It is a mystery!

I said the following on another thread:

One thing is certain. The God of the Bible is eternally Sovereign whether we understand or not.

 

:thumbs::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbs: