If anyone care about facts.

Easy believeism is when God just zaps you with it. Nothing could be easier. Huh!
MB

 

Oh, well I figured you must have sucked in some magic TULIP flower seeds or something while out groundskeeping which apparently took root and blossomed for you to suddenly, without ever reading the pioneers to solve the mystery and come up with the systematic theology of Determinism all on your own. Quite an impressive feat there, friend!!

Nah, I’m afraid I just wasn’t as lucky as you to be predetermined to be specially pre-chosen, for no reason whatsoever, to later be forced against my will to respond in love to God’s truth and receive His Grace. Yep, but when God finished saying Eeny, meeny, miney, moe to make His judgment (Deuteronomy 32:4) before the foundation of the world I could have been standing in the wrong spot BUT praise be to God fortunately I must have been standing close enough to hear and respond when the call came.

Darn, perhaps I missed out on this inheritance of yours that happened when God had to recreate man to no longer be able to use his attributes of sense, reason and intellect once he gained the knowledge of good and evil wherein he could no longer actually have the ability (human volition) to respond to the Good News message Christ brought through His sacrifice on the Cross to which Determinist’ scholars like you have the special understanding of its foreplaned ineffectiveness for most. Thank God it turned out okay!

 

I see, so the Calvinists define transparency as preaching that the Good News is "genuinely" offered to all but only those who have been pre-determined can really hear it, see the light and have the ability to respond. You might want to clarify that "however" for all those left in the dark with no hope so they don't waste their time searching for the truth.

 

Read what God said and believe it. Scripture should convince you. If it doesn't then nothing will.

John 10:14-17,24-29
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.

So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me,is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

 

Oh, but I believe the scriptures, I just don't believe your systematic theology of Determinism to support your question begging conclusion...BTW, neither did any of the Early Church Fathers before Augustine's Gnostic introduction of it. Maybe you should watch the video?

 

Then you believe that the sheep God chooses hear his voice...as God states.
John 10:14-17,24-29
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.

So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me,is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Either you believe what God says or you don't. If you believe Jesus words, you believe that God chooses.

 

Pretty sure the reply was meaningful.

 

No, thank YOU!

 

LOL

 

Would eating of the tree of life, produce any knowledge within Adam? Wonder what kind, if any?

Why did God not want Adam to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

Who told you that thou was naked? Has thou eaten?

Before Adam was created in the image of 'elohiym was it already the plan of God that the Son of God would be born of a virgin woman?

I wonder just what all God did, DETERMINE !

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; (ψυχὴν g5590) the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; ( ψυχικόν From ψυχή (G5590) and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Cor 15:45,46
for we have known that the law is spiritual, and I am fleshly, sold by the sin;

Was the first man Adam created spiritual or of the flesh?
For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it (in hope); Rom 8:20

Before the foundation of the world what was God, DETERMINED, to do?

In hope, what hope? What about the Word made flesh, the Son of God to be sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, a little lower that the angels, because of the death, what hope would he have?

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Methinks, Augustine, Calvin, Arminius and all, think it is just about man.

But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?


Interesting, both singular.

 

I watched the whole video until 5:35 AM and was deeply impressed by both Dr. Wilson and Dr. Flowers and the compelling case for Calvinism as basically an Augustinian heresy reinforced by its Manichaean, and Stoic roots. Jeff, a young TULIP pastor in my city, quit his Presbyterian pastorate because he felt compelled to embrace the points made in this interview. I, an Arminian, actually tried to help Jeff reclaim his Calvinist roots out of compassion for his unemployment and his need to feed his wife and 3 small children. But I was and am so impressed by Jeff's unusual integrity, which rarely finds its equal among my minister brethren. Now after several years of hardship and temporary jobs, Jeff has found a good job at a major university and I remind his friends to let him now how fondly I recall the ruthless integrity of his spiritual quest.

Now, Hiero, I must rebuke you for my resulting insomnia!

 

Me thinks God is Supreme and he simply doesn't answer your questions because he has no obligation to answer. God does what he wills. He is the Potter and we are the clay.

Romans 9:19-24 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

 

I am not a Calvinist. A 52 minute video, 5 minutes into it, I do find it interesting. So, yes, I will make some time to watch it.

Why this post?
What I am interested in are what are the specifics. One point or twelve? A concise summery of the specifics would be nice.

 

I got a few hours sleep after watching the video until 5:35 AM. I feel the need to respond in a nondoctrinal way to this debate.
My greatest objection to Calvinists I meet is their attitude towards witnessing and evangelism. As Donald Barnhouse used to say, "I preach to the cubic foot of air in front of my face and leave the rest to the grace of God." Calvinists I meet seem to use the sovereignty of God as an excuse to evade personal responsibility for the ineffectiveness of their witness. So the how-to of effective witnessing strategies gets overlooked. When the subject of great revivals comes up, they respond, "God is sovereign and if He wants us to have another great awakening, He will give us one in His own good time." This kind of talk sabotages the work of the kingdom of God by evading the issue of what we as a church need to do to facilitate revival.

Paradoxically, on the other hand, the last great revival was the Hebrides revival of 1949-1954 and that revival erupted in a largely Calvinist Presbyterian context. So Calvinism at its best can be an earth-shaking force for God! I encourage readers to watch Duncan Campbell's eyewitness step-by-step account of how the Hebrides revival erupted and consumed these islands. In my view, no more spectacular move of God has ever been recorded for the past 3 centuries:

hebrides revival duncan campbell - Bing video

 

Not only Gnosticism but also the Manicheans, Stoic's, and a few others.
MB

 

Not to the subject of the thread
MB

 

Sure it did. You just think that anything relating to Calvinism isn't meaningful.

 

How and specifics?

I have watched the video through.
I see the problem having to do with not correctly understanding the fall, or Christ's teaching on the new birth, otherwise Augustinianism would have not been accepted.

 

That’s the point. Determinism, and the philosophical constructs used to frame it, Total inability, Unconditional election and Irresistible grace leading to doctrines of Limited atonement and denying free will where not only not believed by the Early Church Fathers but were considered heresy.

Specifically, the video explains that none, zero of the Early Church Fathers accepted these doctrines which denied freedom of the will which originated with the Gnostics and Stoics where Augustine came to understand them through Manicheanism teachings.

Augustine’s views changed due to conflicts and were widely rejected, he went back and revised his prior views to conform to Determinism to line up with his Manicheanism and Gnosticism roots which influenced his position for 10 years after conflict arose over infant baptism wherein, he came up with the necessity of baptismal regeneration of infants because he believed as the Manicheans that babies where born in guilt and damnable sin, which was a different added in view of original sin than had ever been a part of Christianity before that time.

That view of original sin, that man is responsible for the guilt while being unable to respond for lack of Free Will/Human Volition but still culpable for the sins came directly out of the Manicheanism doctrines of all things physical being evil and were never a part of Christianity, until Augustine by means of Determinism.

 

I am fascinated by the Great Awakening and how different it was from the second great awakening led by Finney.
With the first, the prayer involved before preaching is noticeable. Edwards even went out of his way to not call attention. He would read his sermon in a monotone voice and never look up at his audience. God struck his audience to their souls. Whitefield rode on a circuit, tirelessly sharing. God had given him a booming, yet melodious voice so he could speak to thousands with everyone being able to hear. God moved and his audience to their souls. Both prayed deeply for the lost.
Edwards short book entitled "Religious Affections" speaks to his view regarding the evidence of the Holy Spirit in revival.
Finney's revival was much different. Finney established camp meetings where people were preached to for hours upon hours until, by incessant preaching, people made emotional confessions. Finney was also a Pelagian. His views on original sin were wrong and he called for emotional repentance and repeating a prayer to be saved. From this "revival" comes a wide variety of cults, some of which are still in existence today.

My point? My point is that theology matters. We must be diligent and fervent to give the general call of the gospel. The call is either an awakening or it is a damnation upon the dead. Either way, it is the gospel being preached, in obedience to Jesus Great Commission. But, theology matters. Preaching an active and Sovereign (Supreme) God who is in absolute authority over creation is important. Leaving decisions up to human choice and telling humans that they determine their own fate by their own actions diminishes the Supremacy of Christ and breeds a pride in human choice.
Meanwhile, neglecting the severity of sin, while preaching that God chose you also can lead to pride as a person may harbor ideas that he was chosen because of his own goodness and thus he misses the amazing nature of grace. Therefore, theology matters greatly. By knowing the attributes of God and obediently teaching these attributes believers can be spurred on to healthy evangelism.