Choose ye this day whom ye will serve

[Silverhair]

Here is a perfect example of your man-made theology.

How is that man made theology when it comes from the bible. The fact that you deny what scripture clearly shows just proves that you do not trust scripture.

 

[Reformed1689]

As I said, one false charge after another. Calvinism, not any particular Calvinist posting on the BB, denies God commanded all to repent, claiming instead repentance is a gift of God. They falsely claim, because of Total Spiritual Inability, the lost are unable to repent.

Show me where any Calvinist teaches that God does not command all to repent.

 

[Reformed1689]

"Let me ask you a question, do you believe God is supreme?" After all the posts that I have made on here you know that is a really dumb question. Yes I do.

Let me ask you a question, do you believe God is supreme? If you answer Yes then my next question is "Why do you limit what God can do?"

After all you have posted I know you DO NOT belive that. Yes I do believe He is supreme and I have never limited him.

 

[Silverhair]

Yes, the "T" of the TULIP (the Calvinist Philosophy) is not what the bible says about the lost's limited spiritual ability. They (the lost) can understand "Spiritual Milk" (1 Corinthians 3:1-3) but not "Spiritual Solid Food" (1 Corinthians 2:14).
BTW, I am only a 1 point Calvinist, I think the other four points (the TULI) of the TULIP are bogus false doctrines.

I have seen so many different versions of TULIP presented on line by calvinists that I do not think they even know what they are supposed to hold to. I offered reformed1689 the opportunity to explain his views on TULIP and their doctrines and he refused, but he still says we just twist what they say.

 

[Reformed1689]

I have seen so many different versions of TULIP presented on line by calvinists that I do not think they even know what they are supposed to hold to. I offered reformed1689 the opportunity to explain his views on TULIP and their doctrines and he refused, but he still says we just twist what they say.

Must be nice to be so dishonest and not get moderated for it. If me, or @AustinC or @SovereignGrace tried that we would be reprimanded immediately.

 

[Silverhair]

After all you have posted I know you DO NOT belive that. Yes I do believe He is supreme and I have never limited him.

Every time that you deny that God can allow man a free will you are limiting God. Calvinism has decided just how God is to be sovereign and He is not allowed to venture outside of that box or He is not sovereign.

Being sovereign God can do what He wants, when He wants, how He wants. Do you not agree?

 

[Reformed1689]

Every time that you deny that God can allow man a free will you are limiting God. Calvinism has decided just how God is to be sovereign and He is not allowed to venture outside of that box or He is not sovereign.

Being sovereign God can do what He wants, when He wants, how He wants. Do you not agree?

Strawman argument. I did not say that God CAN'T allow a man free will. I said the REALITY is that man does not have free will in the way you try to describe it. In fact, I say that man DOES have free will, but true free will, not the sci-fi free will you ascribe to. Calvinism has decided nothing. It most certainly has not decided anything for me. I get my view of God's sovereignty from Scripture and Scripture alone. It tells us that God is in control, not man. Your view of free will, which is not reality, makes God nothing more than a spectator waiting to see what will happen and hoping for the best. God has told us what His sovereignty means and we must operate within that and not bring humanistic philosophy into it which is what absolute free will advocates such as yourself do.

 

[Silverhair]

Must be nice to be so dishonest and not get moderated for it. If me, or @AustinC or @SovereignGrace tried that we would be reprimanded immediately.

Did I or did I not offer you the chance to explain your view of TULIP and your doctrine?

Silverhair said: ↑
So you use different words but how are they any different from TULIP?

So if you think I can not articulate what calvinist believe, then enlighten me. Now is your best chance to clearly put your views out for all to see.

We will have to continue this latter as it is late here and I have to get some sleep. TaTa​

Your response: We have done this with you already but you just twist our words into something we did not say so why should I waste my time?

 

[Reformed1689]

Did I or did I not offer you the chance to explain your view of TULIP and your doctrine?

Silverhair said: ↑
So you use different words but how are they any different from TULIP?

So if you think I can not articulate what calvinist believe, then enlighten me. Now is your best chance to clearly put your views out for all to see.

We will have to continue this latter as it is late here and I have to get some sleep. TaTa​

Your response: We have done this with you already but you just twist our words into something we did not say so why should I waste my time?

Exactly, we have, and I have, posted my view of TULIP. YOU twist it. Others twist it. So if you want to see it go look it up, it is here on many places at BB.

 

[Silverhair]

Strawman argument. I did not say that God CAN'T allow a man free will. I said the REALITY is that man does not have free will in the way you try to describe it. In fact, I say that man DOES have free will, but true free will, not the sci-fi free will you ascribe to. Calvinism has decided nothing. It most certainly has not decided anything for me. I get my view of God's sovereignty from Scripture and Scripture alone. It tells us that God is in control, not man. Your view of free will, which is not reality, makes God nothing more than a spectator waiting to see what will happen and hoping for the best. God has told us what His sovereignty means and we must operate within that and not bring humanistic philosophy into it which is what absolute free will advocates such as yourself do.

Every time that you deny free will you are denying the sovereignty of God. You want God to fit into the calvinist view of Him. You can not conceive of a God that can and does allow for real free will and yet can and will achieve His goals, will fulfill His plan for His creation.

 

[Silverhair]

Exactly, we have, and I have, posted my view of TULIP. YOU twist it. Others twist it. So if you want to see it go look it up, it is here on many places at BB.

When we point out the errors in your thinking that is not twisting that is correction.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Must be nice to be so dishonest and not get moderated for it. If me, or @AustinC or @SovereignGrace tried that we would be reprimanded immediately.

I called him out for it, but it got deleted and he’s allowed to go on doing it.

 

[Reformed1689]

When we point out the errors in your thinking that is not twisting that is correction.

But you point out errors in claims we have not made. That is twisting and dishonest.

 

[Reformed1689]

Every time that you deny free will you are denying the sovereignty of God. You want God to fit into the calvinist view of Him. You can not conceive of a God that can and does allow for real free will and yet can and will achieve His goals, will fulfill His plan for His creation.

I believe in REAL free will, that is the free will that exists in reality. Not your made up fantasy of free will.

Now, you said something interesting here that actually proves Calvinism. You said that God can and does allow for real free will and will achieve his goals. You claim that his goal and desire is for all men to be saved, yet all men are not saved. So something in your theology is wrong otherwise God doesn't accomplish his will OR his will actually is not for all to be saved. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Silverhair]

But you point out errors in claims we have not made. That is twisting and dishonest.

If you claim to be calvinist and I point out errors in that theology how is that twisting or being dishonest. Do you hold to TULIP, yes you do. When I point out errors in TULIP am I not responding to claims you make since you say your a calvinist. Do you claim calvinism is true? Of course you do. When I make any comment in regard to the errors of calvinism then it is against what you support. That is not twisting or dishonest, you just wish it were.

 

[Reformed1689]

If you claim to be calvinist and I point out errors in that theology how is that twisting or being dishonest. Do you hold to TULIP, yes you do. When I point out errors in TULIP am I not responding to claims you make since you say your a calvinist. Do you claim calvinism is true? Of course you do. When I make any comment in regard to the errors of calvinism then it is against what you support. That is not twisting or dishonest, you just wish it were.

That is precisely my point, you point out errors but not ones Calvinists actually hold to. There are a few buzz words that make it sound similarly veiled to what we hold to but not what we actually teach. So you lose any credibility. You post caricatures and strawman and have not attacked what I actually believe nor any Calvinist I know.

 

[Silverhair]

I believe in REAL free will, that is the free will that exists in reality. Not your made up fantasy of free will.

Now, you said something interesting here that actually proves Calvinism. You said that God can and does allow for real free will and will achieve his goals. You claim that his goal and desire is for all men to be saved, yet all men are not saved. So something in your theology is wrong otherwise God doesn't accomplish his will OR his will actually is not for all to be saved. You can't have it both ways.

You do understand what desire means right. God wants all to be saved but at the same time He will not force man to trust in Him, as calvinists require, that is why He has given man a real free will so they can make real choices in regard to their salvation.

Salvation depends on a “knowledge of the truth” the gospel. Many who have heard it trust in Christ Jesus but many who have heard have rejected it. Now remember your the one that says God has to control all things or He is not sovereign so we have two options as to why some believe and some reject salvation. Free will or determinism. If free will then man is held responsible for his eternal destiny if determinism then God is responsible for the mans eternal destiny. You can't have it both ways. So actually 1Ti 2:3-4 does not support your calvinism.

 

[Reformed1689]

You do understand what desire means right. God wants all to be saved but at the same time He will not force man to trust in Him, as calvinists require, that is why He has given man a real free will so they can make real choices in regard to their salvation.

Salvation depends on a “knowledge of the truth” the gospel. Many who have heard it trust in Christ Jesus but many who have heard have rejected it. Now remember your the one that says God has to control all things or He is not sovereign so we have two options as to why some believe and some reject salvation. Free will or determinism. If free will then man is held responsible for his eternal destiny if determinism then God is responsible for the mans eternal destiny. You can't have it both ways. So actually 1Ti 2:3-4 does not support your calvinism.

Please explain John 6:44 if you say God does not have to force men to change. I want you to exegete that passage for us. If your position is correct, this should be easy for you. But if your position is not correct, that verse would pose some real issues for you.

 

[Silverhair]

That is precisely my point, you point out errors but not ones Calvinists actually hold to. There are a few buzz words that make it sound similarly veiled to what we hold to but not what we actually teach. So you lose any credibility. You post caricatures and strawman and have not attacked what I actually believe nor any Calvinist I know.

Just because you do not like the fact that we point out the errors does not equate to it being a strawman argument. Well as I said before post what you actually believe. Because what I have seen posted and responded to you now claim that is not what you or any other calvinist believes. Then why do you post what you do not believe?

 

[Silverhair]

Please explain John 6:44 if you say God does not have to force men to change. I want you to exegete that passage for us. If your position is correct, this should be easy for you. But if your position is not correct, that verse would pose some real issues for you.

Well first of we have to understand what the word DRAW means. Helkúō is used by Jesus of the drawing of souls unto Him (Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32, to draw or induce to come). Word Study Dic. Induce: Succeed in persuading or leading (someone) to do something. Oxford dictionary

So what do we find in this text? God is drawing souls by persuading or leading them to Christ Jesus. And the next verse tells us how He does that "everyone who has heard and learned" but you ask what are they hearing and learning? The gospel message, that Jesus Christ is the messiah, the saviour of the world. This is also shown in verse 40 " everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life"

The bible is clear that everyone that has heard and learned/believed in Christ Jesus will be saved those that have heard and reject Christ Jesus will be condemned.

If you think that verse would pose a problem for someone that holds to free will then you do not understand the bible or free will.