Featured Calvinist dead

He doesn’t like that term! LOL

 

If @DaveXR650's skin is that thin he has no business on a debate forum.

 

Brethren!... The final answer comes down to this is God Sovereign or is man?... If God is Sovereign man is not, if man is sovereign God can never be... Question... Why was man and woman the last thing God created?... So man could not take any credit in the creation yet they are still claiming they merited eternal Salvation in something they did in tandem with God... A gift is not something you earn... Brother Glen

 

Ky. If this is really a serious question here's what I think of this. First of all, I agree that Romans 9 is an almost insurmountable section on the truth of God's sovereignty. But if you read it in context, the whole chapter, you find that God is enduring with longsuffering and patience those who seem well fitted for wrath. Since we know about Jacob and Esau, they were both scoundrels and God seems to have loved Jacob anyway and looked upon Esau with justice in mind. Look at the different replies on this thread. Do not most non-Calvinists on here have a view of Calvinist sovereignty as God rejecting good people who come to Him rather than the truth, which is that we are all evil and guilty and some are shown mercy. Do we make that clear? Or is their belief based on the nasty judgmental replies we post without much thought.

And then there is verse 30 and 32 and 33, which even in this chapter put the emphasis on faith. Think about it, the most powerful chapter in the Bible on God's sovereignty ends with the words " and whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed". So do you really want to have your response to someone who believes that whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed to be some snide remark about how "their ilk" was predicted years ago?

 

It's becoming apparent to me that your writing style is very similar to @Silverhair 's and now your humanistic reasoning is showing forth.

Are @DaveXR650 and @Silverhair the same entity?

 

Can you actually respond to a post? You even quote my post first so I know you saw it, and this is what you come up with? What a normal person would do, if they didn't agree with my post, is that they would now explain why they believe I have used humanistic reasoning in that. They would not use the fact that they rolled on the floor laughing, or wait for their buddy to come up with another snide remark as their method of debate. That won't do. Why don't you show your reasoning behind the "humanistic reasoning" charge or just agree to disagree.

 

Now you're insulting Silverhair. We go round and round sometimes too and usually end up agreeing to disagree. But I don't know if he's ever just been insulting, without making a point.

 

However he uses terms Hyper-Calvinist Vandals

 

Matthew 19: 16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Good people don't come to God, but sinners are brought to God... Brother Glen

 

I sincerely hope not! God forbid.

 

JD731 said: ↑
Limited atonement is among the worse doctrines ever devised. All men can believe.

No, the point is that Calvinism teaches that non elected sinners cannot believe because of total depravity and unconditional election, and God has ordained it so. Of course you know that already.

Everything about the 5 points of Calvinism is totally and demonstrably untrue, false.

 

I assume you are referring to my statement that non-Calvinists believe that there are "good" people that come to God but can't because of the Calvinist doctrine that God is sovereign in salvation. I agree with you, but my point was that some of the Calvinists on here do nothing to refute that. They respond to anyone who disagrees with any point they make with some kind of charge of heresy or some kind of accusation that they don't back up.

What I was trying to show was that even Romans chapter 9, which I think IS a decisive chapter on God's sovereignty, you have it said several times that those who believe will be fine. We need to emphasize that to non-Calvinists who misunderstand the Calvinistic explanation of God's sovereignty. Because in the back of their minds, they have a vision of a Calvinistic God, in His sovereignty, rejecting someone who comes to Him because He chooses to. That is THE biggest objection that non-Calvinists have to Calvinism.

 

There is no doctrine in the scripture called the sovereignty of God. The word does not appear anywhere in my Bibles. I will start a thread later and prove it from the scripture. My Bible does not say that God could not manage his creation and the affairs of men by the principle of sovereignty if he wanted to. It just tells me he did not and so I conclude that your reasoning and logic is non biblical and unprovable.

 

JD. Thanks for replying. I have to admit your statement is basically true.

@tyndale1946 . Disregard my answer to your post above.

 

JD... I'm not telling you to believe the way I believe, you want to believe something different that is your right... You want to post later your views I'll take a look at it and may change my mind but for right now what I said stands... I learned a long time ago this lesson... Scripture MUST Harmonize!... If scripture is in conflict with another scripture, then the error is in the reader NEVER the writer... The word Sovereignty Of God doesn't need to be in your Bible because it is declared from Genesis through Revelation... God does the saving alone, man does the discipling through God... Brother Glen

 

If this is not 'humanistic reasoning', it's some form of wishy washy watering it down.

What the scriptures states:
22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction:

What Dave says:

What the scripture states:
13 Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.

What Dave says:

What's with inserting 'seem' and 'seems' into the mix? There's no 'seems' about it.

 

Hmm, catholism and symbolism is heavy (like the cross and stained glass window) then Calvinism and a solid rejection of said symbolism … I see both having transcendent experiences in an attempt at attaining an inward spiritual experience. But I do not see the link. The uniqueness of my spiritual experience totally lies in biblical truth in translating the word of God into His will for us to live and think…and that is transformative.

What I was looking for is a link between Catholicism & Calvinism, surely as an ex-Calvinist you could explain how they are codependent to one another.

 

Well, thanks for the reply. I read that thread. I guess I just don't agree with the logical connection between the two though. I will say this. There are Calvinist writers that say men can go quite far in pursuing morality and virtue and in attempting to follow God's laws. They just insist that a saving faith in Christ and the renouncing of all self worth or merit is out of our reach without a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit.

One reason I don't get upset with those who come to Christ by faith yet aren't Calvinist in their theology is that I believe if you come it is because the Holy Spirit worked in you. But even if you don't see it that way saving faith is saving faith. I believe scripture supports my theology but here is the important distinction. Calvinism teaches that God has a decreed will and a revealed will. What he has decreed is what is going to come to pass. What he has revealed as His will is what we are supposed to hear and obey. His revealed will to all of us is that we repent and believe the gospel. Those who do that are pleasing God by doing His revealed will and they are part of His divine decree of election. His decreed will is that before the foundation of the world God chose an "elect" that in His timing will be brought to faith and salvation. If I'm wrong on that I'm not going to be angry if someday I find out it was totally due to my good sense that I repented and believed. And I hope you won't be disappointed if you find out someday that you were elect from the foundation of the world.