Featured About a Pastor who was twice a 5 point Calvinist.

Dave you still avoid the reality of your calvinism. If as the calvinist insists, that God determines all things which means man does not have a free will then to say that man could not avoid sin by his own ability is a red herring. Under calvinism man can do nothing that God has not decreed for him to do. So the sin or the ability not to sin is controlled by your version of God.

All the good or bad choices that the calvinist man makes are totally out of his control. His choices are caused by God not by his free will there is not voluntary choice involved.

But under the biblical version of God man does have the free will to make voluntary choices and will rightfully be held accountable for those choices. That is why man can be held responsible for rejecting salvation through trusting in Christ Jesus.

 

No, what you are doing is assuming that men are if not good, at least morally neutral except for the fact that God did something to them. Like I said, there may be some who believe that, but I haven't come across it so far. Honestly, putting theology aside for a minute, the most observable trait I have seen in men in my 67 years is total depravity. And, just from observation and science I am very skeptical that anyone has a "true free will". I'm not the spokesman for Calvinism, but I believe that God is sovereign over all things, not that he minutely determines all things. Some Calvinists do believe that but I don't. And not all Calvinists believe it either.

 

If one has to depend upon the hope that they were one of the pre-selected ones even to the point that the faith they have had to be given to them then how would that person really know if they were indeed saved. It could all be just wishful thinking. Remember they are not trusting in Christ they are actually trusting in that election before time began.

 

Although he provides some arguments, that was only his observation. The difficulty would be in explaining without contradiction how the description you offered differs from his. But if Calvinism does not really require the usual corpses, then perhaps there’s no argument here.

 

On your last point "natural men, even heathens, could go quite far in cultivating morality and virtue - but not salvation" I would agree. Man can be good because he has a free will but he can also be bad because he has a free will. My point is that because man does have a free will they can freely trust in God and God saves those that trust in Him. So man must believe so as to be saved he is not saved so that he will believe. This is the point that I think the Puritans were making, I stand to be corrected as I do not read them.

 

So you as you just stated God also reprobates billions to hell for no other reason than He chose not to pick them. I would have to surmise that you think you are one of the chosen ones so I have tom ask, what made you more special than all those that were condemned?

 

Like you I do not believe that man is morally neutral, life has shown me that the trend of man is generally down. Young fellow, I have 6 years on you, what I have seen is that man is depraved but not as bad as they could be, although Putin is giving that a run for it’s money. As for “true free will” I agree man always has outside influences. But that is just the point, if God as the typical calvinist posits has determined all things then He has to control all things and is the one that is ultimately responsible for all things.

Now I agree with you that God is sovereign over all things but He does not have to control all things which is contrary to how some use the word sovereign. He, in his sovereignty, can and does allow for man’s free will choices up to and including whether to accept or reject Him as soviour.

If I have painted you with a view that you do not hold I do apologize for that.

But what I have found is that many calvinists seem to pick from a smorgasbord of ideas that they fit together into what they feel is biblical. This does make it a challenge to respond to them as it is sometimes like trying to nail jello to a wall to get them to state what they actually believe.

 

In the event that it involves an ETERNALLY SAVED soul;

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit,
that we are the children of God:"

 

We are children of God after we believe not before and certainly not before the foundation of the world.
Joh_1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:

No ones soul is saved until they trust in the risen saviour.

 

Perhaps someday you'll see your heart's desire and Calvinism will cease to exist and there'll be world peace.

Now you're falsely accusing like some 'Calvinists' I know. Maybe you've more in common with that 'evil sect' than you know.

 

If that were all it would take for world peace but alas it would not be so.

KY your the one that says we are judged by our works so you need to own that view.

 

I certainly do that. I have no reason to feel that I need to be the defender of Calvinism at all costs. I have also noticed that the Puritans had a very different tone at least when it comes to Calvinism than the modern kids that are involved in the Calvinism resurgence that you see with the Young Restless and Reformed and the internet era Calvinist debaters. For example; Puritans had no problem in preaching or writing about the responsibility for you to come to Christ and the dangers if you didn't and then leave it at that, with no reservation about it being up to you to do it. Faith is portrayed as a "condition" of salvation that you must personally have. A holy life then must be lived and pursued and you must do it. Then they would freely give all credit for doing this and freely say that all the power to do this came directly from the Holy Spirit. A modern Calvinist, or someone who came to believe Calvinism from modern internet gurus or YRR preachers would tend to immediately bristle and contradict faith as a "condition" or the necessity of living a holy life because they are worried that you could be undermining the idea of it being all of God. I haven't figured out why this seems to be the case but I suspect it may be that the YRR and internet Calvinists tend to be smart kids who like to parse word meanings and the Puritans were more coming at it from a ministry standpoint. I don't know.

 

Couldn't tell from the plethora of attacks you direct at Calvinism.

No. Not my words, but straight from an abundance of scripture that I've provided. You're falsely accusing again, just like some Calvinists that I know.

 

[John 6:44 NASB95] 44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

… How do you know that God drew you?

[John 6:43-44 NASB95] 43 Jesus answered and said to them, "Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

…Jesus appears to be telling them that the Father did not draw them.

[The fact that you came to Jesus rather than stood off grumbling against Jesus is the proof that they (and you) were drawn … now apply that same logic to your question about Atonement.]

Jesus didn’t bother atoning for any sins that will need no atoning … because that sinner will forever reject Him and ultimately be cast into the Lake of Fire. Jesus did atone for EVERY sin that will ever be atoned for because the Father will draw, His sheep will hear and Jesus will raise them to eternal life on the Last Day.

As John 3:18 states, there are only two groups and you are either in one or you are in the other.

 

• (Calvinist 1971) “I've been a Five-Point Calvinist twice in my life. After the Lord called me to preach in 1971, I began my studies at Miami Bible College (Miami, FL) in the fall of that year. At age 23, like most Baptists, I knew little about theological or doctrinal issues. The professorial staff, however, was almost entirely Calvinist. Little by little I got exposed to election, predestination and the Five Points, and wondered why I had never heard this from my pastor.”
• (Arminian 1973) “In the summer of 1973, I went to Alaska for three weeks to help a missionary establish a youth camp. A few months before making the trip, I remember being postrate in prayer at our apartment. I had been called to preach and had come to realize there might be negative consequences to preaching Calvinism in churches I would pastor. So I told the Lord that no matter the consequences I would preach ‘the whole counsel of God’ (i.e., Calvinism) without regard for favorable-unfavorable responses. But I added: “Lord, if Calvinism is NOT the truth, and there is more light I need to see, please reveal that light to me BEFORE I embark upon my first pastorate.”
  A few months later I was in Alaska with Baptist missionary Lindsey Williams. The Lord woke me up about 4 a.m. one morning with this scripture like a neon light flashing in my mind: "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth" (Romans 8:33). It was the light for which I had prayed. In that scripture, the Lord showed me that ALL of his elect are justified and there were NO lost elect men. Since lost, unjustified men ARE chargeable, NO lost man can be among the elect. God’s elect are ALL justified; they are ALL chosen in Christ (Ephesians 1:4).”
• (Calvinist 1995) “In the mid-1990's, I reverted back to five-point Calvinism for a short period of time. The reasons are not important. As a result, the Lord granted me more light and clarity on the fundamental errors of Calvinistic thought and made me a better contextual expositor.”
• (Arminian 2022 - blog) “These are the practical implications of the Gospel and the Calvinism that assaults it. For this reason, NO Calvinist belongs in a Baptist pulpit anywhere. He should choose an alternative tag where he can practice no evangelism, no empty appeals to the lost, no misrepresentation of the Almighty. He can be content to let God bring the elect to the church pews in his time as He sees fit.”

After studying Calvinism and Arminianism from 1971 to 2022, he should be able to accurately articulate the beliefs and know where he stands on those beliefs. He incorrectly states a hypothetical about a reprobate shaking a fist at God because he wanted to repent and tried to repent but God rejected him because he was not among the “elect” … which I and others have noted is something antithetical to the Calvinistic worldview. It is like arguing about the man that lived a sinless life and went to hell just because he never heard the gospel (such a thing cannot exist).

Given his track record, he should swing back to Calvinist by 2025.

That is the “waffling” of which I speak. [Ephesians 4:14]

 

Adam and Eve … Original Sin … the Adamic Curse.
(Any of that ring a bell?)

• God certainly FOREKNEW it and pre-planned the whole “savior thing”.
• God certainly ALLOWED it to happen (Omni-everything means that God could have stopped it but did not).
• God CAUSED it … no, that goes too far. Scripture does not say that so neither does Calvinism.

 

Must be an age thing. The Puritans seem to be people that I would relate to much more than these YRR types that you run across out here now. It seems that they have moved from the bible being their authority to trusting in the popular voices out there.

 

KY what you call an attack on calvinism I would call just pointing out the errors and contradictions that one finds in that theology. As I said, if you think your good works will save you good luck with that. Should we do good works YES.

 

How do I know that God drew me, simple I responded. How did He draw me? Through creation, conviction of the Holy Spirit of my sinful nature, hearing the gospel, reading the bible, even talks with my dad.

John 6:43-44 actually God did draw them but they refused to come. Se verse 41 "The Jews then complained about Him" they did not accept Christ. God reaches out to mankind but mankind can refuse the offer. God's desire is that all should come to repentance but we know all do not do so. So we have two options here 1] God actually is making a good faith offer of salvation or 2] God is being disingenuous and does not in fact want all to come to repentance. Or in simple terms God lied. Now since God cannot lie that really only leaves one option # 1.

Rom 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Rom 5:2 through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
Rom 5:3 And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance;
Rom 5:4 and perseverance, character; and character, hope.
Rom 5:5 Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.
Rom 5:6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
Rom 5:7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die.
Rom 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
Rom 5:10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,

The bible is clear that Christ died for all, even those that will in the end reject Him. Such is the love of God.

You refer to Christ as the shepherd of the sheep and this is true but the context presents a contrast of Israel's leaders and Jesus. I think that the following commentary from Warren Wiersbe explains in much better than I could have done
This sermon grew out of our Lord’s confrontation with Jewish leaders, following the excommunication of the beggar (Joh_9:1-41). ...to the Jewish mind, a “shepherd” was any kind of leader, spiritual or political. People looked on the king and prophets as shepherds. Israel was privileged to be “the flock of the Lord” (Psa_100:3). ...When Jesus came to the nation of Israel, He came the appointed way, just as the Scriptures promised. Every true shepherd must be called of God and sent by God. If he truly speaks God’s Word, the sheep will “hear his voice” and not be afraid to follow him. The true shepherd will love the sheep and care for them. Wiersbe John 10:1-42