Calvinism and the God of Second Chances

A qualified group? Scott, you really need to get a better understanding of both Greek and English in these Scriptures. Whosoever is the broadest term possible. It means absolutely anyone without restriction. This is the historic, linguistic, and socio-anthropological definition of the word and comports with all other uses and references in Scripture.

You tread a very dangerous line when you invent such invalid new definitions of words for the purpose of making Scripture match your doctrine.

 

ahhh... but we should trust you..... riigghhtttt, how many years of Greek and Hebrew have you had wildfire? what makes you qualified to "correct" our English translations?

blessings,
Ken </font>[/QUOTE]Ahhh, Ken, the trick of cults and false doctines ... allow me to throw out my worldly credentials. So, if I can show you a Jehovah's Witness who has been studying Greek and Hebrew for fifty years, will you accept his teaching?

If not, then you shouldn't be concerned about scoring points like that.

I'm not asking anyone to trust me, any more than I'm asking them to trust you. I keep asking for a single, clear verse that says what Calvinist want everyone to believe they say. What I get instead is poor defintions of words like "whosever" and cherry picking verses out of prophesies that apply to the nation of Israel.

2 Peter 3:9 is clear in both Greek and English, and the translation rendered in KJV, NKJV, NIV, NLT and other has been unversally accepted as accurate. God is not willing that any man should perish.

Now, Calvinist like to say that "in context" this is talking to people who are already regenerate believers. But to be consistent with form and context, and with the structure of the Greek, it would then say "God is not willing that you should perish," or "God is not willing that the elect should perish."

But it doesn't say that. It says "anyone."

Once again, folks, here's the question. Throughout Scripture, God begs people to beieve in Him, and to repent. If He decides who will believe, why does that message get repeated literally hundreds of times throughout Scripture?

That is the question that Calvinists repeatedly skip over, because there is just simply no good answer that comports with bad doctrine.

 

Actually I read that, Andy. It's a pretty obtuse statement based on a single and questionable definition.

First: Will is also defined as making a choice. So the definition then becomes "whosoever chooses."

And since "whosoever will" in the context you chose to define is not found in all cases, we have to compare your assumed defintion with the one I just provided. Since we also see "whosoever blieves," (Jn 3:16), "If any man hears my voice ... " (Rev 3:20), "God is not willing that anyone should perish" (2 Peter 3:9).

Calvinists have to keep redefinng the word and the context each time to find a way that "everyone" means "just who God picks" and where "whole world" means "only the elect."

There. Now you have an answer. I didn't skip over the posts as you accuse. I just found it so obviously flawed that I didn't really think I needed to point it out to everyone.

 

Actually I read that, Andy. It's a pretty obtuse statement based on a single and questionable definition.

First: Will is also defined as making a choice. So the definition then becomes "whosoever chooses."

And since "whosoever will" in the context you chose to define is not found in all cases, we have to compare your assumed defintion with the one I just provided. Since we also see "whosoever believes," (Jn 3:16), "If any man hears my voice ... " (Rev 3:20), "God is not willing that anyone should perish" (2 Peter 3:9).

Calvinists have to keep redefinng the word and the context each time to find a way that "everyone" means "just who God picks" and where "whole world" means "only the elect."

There. Now you have an answer. I didn't skip over the posts as you accuse. I just found it so obviously flawed that I didn't really think I needed to point it out to everyone. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

Actually I read that, Andy. It's a pretty obtuse statement based on a single and questionable definition.

First: Will is also defined as making a choice. So the definition then becomes "whosoever chooses."

And since "whosoever will" in the context you chose to define is not found in all cases, we have to compare your assumed defintion with the one I just provided. Since we also see "whosoever believes," (Jn 3:16), "If any man hears my voice ... " (Rev 3:20), "God is not willing that anyone should perish" (2 Peter 3:9).

Calvinists have to keep redefining the word and the context each time to find a way that "everyone" means "just who God picks" and where "whole world" means "only the elect."

There. Now you have an answer. I didn't skip over the posts as you accuse. I just found it so obviously flawed that I didn't really think I needed to point it out to everyone. </font>[/QUOTE]</font>[/QUOTE]

 

There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.

- Romans 3:10-11

Also, Romans 9. Now, I know we disagree with each other on the interpretation of these verses, but to keep repeating the same mantra of "not one verse" supports your view is tiresome. It reminds me of those who deny the Trinity who say there is "not one verse" that has Trinity in it or defines it. Well, sure, but orthodox Christians understand many passages to be speaking of the Trinity and they formulate their doctrine from those verses. Same thing here - you and I have come to different formulations, that's all. </font>[/QUOTE]Andy, the problem is that those verses really don't say clearly what you want them to say. I can show you verses that say "whosoever believes," "God is not willing that anyone should perish," etc. That's clear.

If there is none righteous, how does that prove that no man has free will? If no man understands, does that prove no man has free will? If there is none who seeks after God, does that prove anthing about election or free will?

But if you skip down to verses 19 and 20, you find that Paul is referring to man's state under law ... that no man is declared righteous under law. So his argument is that we're saved by Christ alone ... he doesn't argue anything about election or against free will.

So, once again, the question is out there ... please show me one verse that actually says that man doesn't have free will. One verse that actually says that no man can come to faith without first being elected and regenerated.

 

This is the third or fourth time you've stated that God "begs" for people to repent all throughout Scripture. I did a search for "beg" and "plead" (NIV - because it appears that's what you use), and I didn't find one verse showing where God begs or pleads to us. I saw several verses of man begging or pleading to God, but none the other way around. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you now resorting to semantics? When someone repeats over and over again the same request ... "come to me," "turn to me," "put aside your false idols," "only believe," over and over ... that person is pleading with you to take an action. If I told you God asked a question, would you do a word search on the word "question" and then tell me that because you can't find "question," God never asked one?

 

Non-Trinitarian: Show me one verse that actually says "Trinity" or clearly defines the Trinity, and I will believe it. </font>[/QUOTE]Weak argument. You won't find "rapture" either, but you'll find a clear description of it. You don't find the word "trinity," but you find clear descriptions of the trinity throughout scripture. But you don't find a single passage of Scripture that clearly says that no man can come to God without first being elected and regenerated. Not even using other terms. Not one verse. Only verses that say we're save by grace through faith. Nothing that says we're saved by grace through election and regeneration or anything remotely like it.

 

And there we agree 100%. Whosover believes. Not whosoever is elected. Choice, not tyranny.

 

Let's turn the tables. Show me one verse that shows man has unfetterred free will that is not influenced by anything, esp. sin, so that he is completely able to choose Christ on his own. Also, show me one verse that says faith in Christ causes our regeneration.

If you think the Doctrines of Grace are so utterly baseless in Scripture, you must really think awful things about your brothers in Christ. What, are we complete idiots? Are we completely disobedient to the Word of God? It must be something, else we wouldn't hold to such gross error. So which is it? Are we dumb, evil or both? </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, those are exactly the verses I have been showing. WHOSOEVER BELIEVES. No other qualifier. SAVED BY GRACE THROGH FAITH, no other qualifier. NOT WILLING THAT ANYONE SHOULD PEERISH, no other qualifier.

No, I don't think awful things about my fellow Christians. I just hate that the great, liberating, freedom of the Gospels has been so misrepresented by Augustine and Calvin, and that so many people are taken in by this false doctrine.

God's grace is free to whosoever will accept it. What can be greater grace than that?

On the other hand, why would you want to believe in a God who picks people to go to Hell for their unbelief, without giving them any ability to believe? Punishing them for something that they have absolutely no choice or control over? Is that the God of grace and love?