Can You Come to Christ on Your Own

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The only way to not have difficulty in resolution or paradox, is to go either with complete causative determinism or hyper-Calvinism or go all the way the other way to a complete free will Pelagianism. Everyone in between has to deal at some level with how are you going to reconcile the sovereignty of God with the responsibility of man.
Owen, Watson, Bunyan were militant Calvinists back when it really mattered and yet they made offers of the gospel and preached in a way that called for decision in response to the gospel offer. Same with later guys living in more open times like Bonar, Spurgeon, and J.C. Ryle. They were well known as 5 point Calvinists and yet preached like Baptists. They believed in "soul winning".

It is true we always like to describe ourselves as "moderate". John R. Rice said he was a moderate Calvinist and then proceeded to dismantle all the 5 points except the "P".

Rice was no Calvinist!

 

[AustinC]

What would you call them then? Perhaps Arminians!

oh I have it, Cal-Minian, a coined term that attempts to depict a theological ground half-way between Calvinism and Arminianism! Personally, It’s a very shrewd posture to take if you want to capture more people for your new religious agenda. Good work Andy… get close enough to Gill to mimic many of his doctrines, namely DOG, but continue slipping in questions & innuendo, just enough to create controversy. Then add side comments that you’re the instrument (of God) that will eradicate High Calvinism … hint, call it Hyper Calvinism at party’s and get togethers for added effect. Shrewd… you must have worked way into the night to come up with that game plan.

Semi-pelagian is a more descriptive term for anyone who picks and chooses the 5 main points of Calvinist soteriology, but perhaps semi-Armenian or semi-Calvinist would work. In any case that person has determined to live with open contradictions that cannot be resolved. They will hold to a position that is unreasonable and irrational while ignoring anyone who calls them out on the contradictions they hold.

 

[Brightfame52]

davexr

No. I don't agree with your view but I appreciate your honesty.

Most disagree with me

I started this thread asking for people's views on coming to Christ and I respect your opinion. I'd say you are at the opposite of George.

Okay, a person cannot come to Christ unless they have been born anew from above.

 

[Brightfame52]

Exactly!

What ? Someone agrees with me ?

 

[kyredneck]

There is no such thing as a "moderate calvinist."

Lol, so what kind of Calvinist would you call this? Milquetoast Calvinist? Calminian? Squirrelly Calvinist?

 

[kyredneck]

Most disagree with me

What ? Someone agrees with me ?

I agree totally with your view on the eternal aspect of our salvation, i.e., that part that we're passive in. You're sorely lacking in the area of our temporal or gospel salvation, i.e., that part we are active in.

Belief, Obedience and Action | Page 3 | Baptist Christian Forums (baptistboard.com)

 

[DaveXR650]

Rice was no Calvinist!

Uh. That was the point. Everybody calls themselves a moderate Calvinist.

 

[DaveXR650]

Lol, so what kind of Calvinist would you call this? Milquetoast Calvinist? Calminian? Squirrelly Calvinist?

Well. I know now how William F. Buckley felt after debating Gore Vidal. It would be nice if you actually had a thought to consider.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Lol, so what kind of Calvinist would you call this? Milquetoast Calvinist? Calminian? Squirrelly Calvinist?

First, doctrine ripped from scripture must be applied to a Calvinist belief system… so is that the abiding belief principle in this individual?

 

[kyredneck]

It would be nice if you actually had a thought to consider.

It would be nice if you took a scriptural stance and stuck with it.

You're all over the place.

 

[AustinC]

Lol, so what kind of Calvinist would you call this? Milquetoast Calvinist? Calminian? Squirrelly Calvinist?

It's called DaveX attempting to be provocative without ever being declarative. He floats on the words of others and offers questions in an attempt to always stay floating off the ground so that no substance ever grounds him to the earth. At least that's my perception of how DaveX operates. He's sort of like a Neville Chamberlain.

 

[kyredneck]

It's called DaveX attempting to be provocative without ever being declarative. He floats on the words of others and offers questions in an attempt to always stay floating off the ground so that no substance ever grounds him to the earth. At least that's my perception of how DaveX operates. He's sort of like a Neville Chamberlain.

We used to call guys like Dave a 'mugwump', right here on the BB. (nothing new under the sun)

 

[George Antonios]

I'm quoting John R. Rice from his book "False Doctrines" page 275 in the chapter on "Hyper-Calvinism"
"God...now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?"

Can that be squared with " No man can come to Christ, unless the Father draws him". John 6:44 ?

It seems to me that you can go several ways with this.
1. John Rice is correct.
2. The Calvinists who say you have a group of people who are elect and they alone are involved in any call to faith and
repentance.
3. It is legitimate and God does call on everyone to repent and they can properly be held responsible because the problem is
is with the depravity of the person themself and with their affections and will.

To me, number 3 is the only way it makes sense. What do you with John 6:44? (Or the whole of John 6?)

What's the issue with John 6? There is no issue.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Uh. That was the point. Everybody calls themselves a moderate Calvinist.

I’m not, not a Presbyterian…. We baptists do follow Christs example of believers baptism and foot washing however.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We used to call guys like Dave a 'mugwump', right here on the BB. (nothing new under the sun)

Would you have called Andrew Feller a mugwump?

 

[DaveXR650]

What's the issue with John 6? There is no issue.

Well, what do you do with some of those verses in John 6, like verse 37, 44, and 65? They seem to indicate more than God laying out a plan and then waiting to see what men do on their own to respond to the gospel.

What is your understanding as far as an "internal" work of grace in the quote in the OP?

 

[DaveXR650]

It's called DaveX attempting to be provocative without ever being declarative. He floats on the words of others and offers questions in an attempt to always stay floating off the ground so that no substance ever grounds him to the earth. At least that's my perception of how DaveX operates. He's sort of like a Neville Chamberlain.

It's true I don't think it's any use to call people names and question their salvation and things like that, which I see a lot on this board. That leaves you with actually discussing the pros and cons of what people say rather than just attack. If you're interested let me say this. I find that the great Calvinist preachers seem to say a lot of things that flat out contradict what some of you Calvinists on this board are saying. They preached messages filled with offers of salvation IF you would believe, they preached these as universal, they exhorted people to improve upon any conviction or grace they experienced, they flat out said that Christ's work and sacrifice was available to you upon your receiving of it. They said that Jesus was knocking at the door of your heart, that he was patiently inviting you to come. They encouraged everyone to make every effort to come to Christ.

Now I am having a hard time reconciling this with what some of you guys are saying. And frankly, when comparing you and a couple of guys that look like they came off the set of "Deliverance" with Owen, Edwards, Watson, Bunyan and all the other great Calvinists who lived it - well I'm going to have to go with them. Unless that is, you can come up with some kind of a real argument or show me where I'm wrong.

 

[DaveXR650]

Lol, so what kind of Calvinist would you call this? Milquetoast Calvinist? Calminian? Squirrelly Calvinist?

We used to call guys like Dave a 'mugwump', right here on the BB. (nothing new under the sun)

Looks to me like you're out of ammo.

 

[AustinC]

It's true I don't think it's any use to call people names and question their salvation and things like that, which I see a lot on this board. That leaves you with actually discussing the pros and cons of what people say rather than just attack. If you're interested let me say this. I find that the great Calvinist preachers seem to say a lot of things that flat out contradict what some of you Calvinists on this board are saying. They preached messages filled with offers of salvation IF you would believe, they preached these as universal, they exhorted people to improve upon any conviction or grace they experienced, they flat out said that Christ's work and sacrifice was available to you upon your receiving of it. They said that Jesus was knocking at the door of your heart, that he was patiently inviting you to come. They encouraged everyone to make every effort to come to Christ.

Now I am having a hard time reconciling this with what some of you guys are saying. And frankly, when comparing you and a couple of guys that look like they came off the set of "Deliverance" with Owen, Edwards, Watson, Bunyan and all the other great Calvinists who lived it - well I'm going to have to go with them. Unless that is, you can come up with some kind of a real argument or show me where I'm wrong.

Dave, in matters of God's Supremacy there is no "pro" to man-centered salvation. There is only "con." But, you attempt to make bad doctrine equitable to good doctrine. That's not debate. That's being unwilling, or unable to state your position and hold your ground.
Therefore, state your view and hold firm to it. Otherwise you are merely playing the role of octopus as you squeeze around everything. Do you have a theological spine?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

It's true I don't think it's any use to call people names and question their salvation and things like that, which I see a lot on this board. That leaves you with actually discussing the pros and cons of what people say rather than just attack. If you're interested let me say this. I find that the great Calvinist preachers seem to say a lot of things that flat out contradict what some of you Calvinists on this board are saying. They preached messages filled with offers of salvation IF you would believe, they preached these as universal, they exhorted people to improve upon any conviction or grace they experienced, they flat out said that Christ's work and sacrifice was available to you upon your receiving of it. They said that Jesus was knocking at the door of your heart, that he was patiently inviting you to come. They encouraged everyone to make every effort to come to Christ.

Now I am having a hard time reconciling this with what some of you guys are saying. And frankly, when comparing you and a couple of guys that look like they came off the set of "Deliverance" with Owen, Edwards, Watson, Bunyan and all the other great Calvinists who lived it - well I'm going to have to go with them. Unless that is, you can come up with some kind of a real argument or show me where I'm wrong.

See that’s the point… you are putting your faith on men and not on the Creator… so who are you following Dave, where are you placing your trust?