Featured Romans Chapter 1

Hmm? These come immediately to mind: Matthew 11:25-27; John 1:11-13; 6:44; 10:26-27; Acts 13:48; Romans 9:15-16; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:8; Revelation 7:10. I'm sure there are more if I think about it. But the Gospel is great news. 'Everyone who calls on the Lord will be saved.'

Men can give up drinking, smoking, swearing, gambling, wife-beating etc. but that still won't make them right with God (c.f. Matthew 23:25).. You have misunderstood the point I was making.

There are five quotations from the Bible in this extract. Are they not in your Bible?

There is no problem with that. The sinner's warrant to come to Christ is not that he is elect, but that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners. I am a sinner; I have trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ for my salvation. Therefore I am one of the elect. Simples!

Exactly right! And your point is?

Yes indeed! But the faith is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God.

The vast crowd is whosoever believeth. And since faith is the gift of God, they also are the elect. That is why they say, 'salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.'

 

I answered your post #24. I can't help it if you don't like my reply.
However, since you asked so nicely, here's an answer to post #36

As stated, they are not physically unable to come to Christ in repentance and faith; they are morally and spiritually unable to come to Christ (1 Corinthians 2:14 etc.). For this they are without excuse.

No.

 

I hate to burst yer bubble but your logic is not divine, it is a programmed Systematic Deterministic philosophical construct that seems to have your reasoning abilities under the influence of blinders! By the way, you just unwittingly gave a great example of my point about Calvinist neglect of simple logical truth. Too funny:

Calvinist: “God determined all things that ever happen, He is Sovereign."

Free Will: "Did God determine the things Jeffrey Dahmer did?"

Calvinist: "No, Jeffrey Dahmer did what he did because of his nature."

Free Will: "Who determined Jeffrey Dahmer’s nature?"

Calvinist: "God did, He determines all things, He is Sovereign."

 

FYI, I, like most non-Determinists, believe God is in complete Sovereign control of the world which includes as per divine design the ability to create men to have free will/ human volition. I call this Divine Providential Sovereign Control which differs from the Calvinistic philosophical construct that insists God is incapable of Sovereignty over His creation without strict "Deterministic Sovereign Control". Such Deterministic folly not only serves to limit God's abilities to control His creation as divinely designed but unavoidably logically attributes evil to God leading the Calvinist/Determinist into Theological Fatalism.

You guys don't get a monopoly on defining God's Sovereignty.

 

As I pointed out earlier, you actually don't understand the Calvinist position.

From the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith 3:1.
--God has decreed in Himself from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things which shall ever come to pass (1).
--Yet in such a way that God is neither the author of sin nor does He have fellowship [i.e. mutual responsibility] with any (2) in the committing of sins, nor is violence offered to the will of the creature [no one is made to sin] nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away [i.e. nor is the free working of the law of cause and effect interfered with] but rather established (3).
--In all this God's wisdom is displayed, disposing all things, and also His power and faithfulness [to His own holy character and His revealed word] in establishing His decree (4).
(1) Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18.
(2) James 1:13-15; 1 John 1:5.
(3) Acts of the Apostles 4:27-28; John 19:11.
(4) Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5.

Your basic problem is that you are relying on your own fallen human logic, rather than simply believing the word of God. 'Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.'

Jeffrey Dahmer, whoever he may be, did whatever he did because of the wickedness of his own heart, for which he alone was responsible. Yet God was not an impotent bystander, but permitted all such events for His own high purposes (c.f. Romans 8:18-25). I think I read somewhere that about 186,000 people die every day, yet not one of them passes outside of the will of God (Matthew 10:29-31).

 

Calvinists always seem to fall back on the statement above every time what they're saying doesn't make any rational logical sense. Some times however things they claim about God are just foolish period and have no validity whatsoever.

I suppose though it can be a good technique to cause a genuine thinking person's mind to shut down and not be like the noble Bereans who studied the scriptures to ensure such things are so. They must have concluded too that some claims some make about God are just that ....foolish. So seeking to make an appeal this way that I know it seems foolish but that's probably a sign to you it's probably true one might not want to consider giving serious consideration. Foolish does mean sometimes just plain foolish.

Forsake the foolish and live; and go in the way of understanding. Prov 9:6

Go from the presence of a foolish man when you perceive not in him the lips of knowledge.
Prov 14:7

And five of them were wise and five of them were foolish. Matt 25: 2

 

Sorry I'm not buying this how Calvinists swing back to things that God just permits as being equivalent to a decree. I think it's disingenuous to try twist language around to say things like decreeing things or ordaining things can mean just allowed.

And I don't see too often any great push to clarify terms when they've won the unsuspected into Calvinistic thinking to stop them and say, "But remember now! Things decreed doesn't mean he made it happen that way!" Nope. It seems they only do that when someone more studious challenges them on the issue. But to say decreed or things being ordained can mean just allows breaks the laws of language use.

John Calvin writes: “We also note that we should consider the creation of the world so that we may realize that everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens other than what God decrees.” (Acts: Calvin, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.66, emphasis mine)

If every act is ordained or decreed as something God wanted to happen and that's before a person was created then that logically would mean God had to create or make sure a certain mental state for that individual would go along with their life.

So God forbid that anyone believes this but sadly it seems Calvinists do, but that would mean actual sin acts...adultery or other unspeakable works of the flesh....God wanted? Those individual acts took place ON THE WORLD (see above quote) So how do Calvinists get out of this ditch? Sorry but you can't. If you're going to say God desired it to happen than what's that say about his character which we're led to believe stands vehemently against evil....which he does.

 

Buddy, again I hate to burst yer bubble, but I'm pretty confident I could defend the Calvinist position in a debate better than you could.

Your basic problem is that don't seem to realize that you are #1 calling my reasoning "my own fallen human logic" as if your logic is somehow superior, then you unwittingly go on present the failed fallen logic the 1689 LBC writers. FYI, I am very familiar with and understand full well that the 1689 LBC offers up a philosophical construct of Compatibility between Determinism and Free Will/Human Volition that your own fallen human logic has failed to recognize as fallacious nonsense which my synopsis above exposes why their and your reasoning based on Compatibility is fallacious. Further, you are not the first Calvinists to fall into buying the 1689 LBDC writer's statements of superior enlightenment while putting their reasoning on a pedestal that would be closer to the Word of God than "fallen human logic" which comparisons are evident by your unwittingly following your claims against human logic by presenting the fallacious logic of these writers.

It is painfully obvious that you don't understand that you are making an argument against human logic while using it yourself by agreeing with the philosophical constructs of the LBC writers who are presenting their human logic. I've heard these very same arguments from Calvinists on several occasions and I've got to tell you that it reminds me of people who follow a cult and can't think for themselves while accepting the words of their "teachers" as if their interpretations are infallible inspired spiritually superior enlightenment that is above comparison to human logic!

Unfortunately, your reasoning neglects to understand the simple logical truth that something (human volition) cannot be both true and not true in any logically true sense. You probably have not even recognized that the 1689 LBC attempts to use the the failed logic of a philosophical construct "Compatibility" to get around this issue. Also, you don't seem to realize that your reasoning follows with a fallacious strawman ("God was not an impotent bystander") and that you fallaciously Beg the Question with the proof-texts that you offer as if they support "your" human logical theories of Compatibilism.

 

I will only point out that there were twelve quotations from the Bible linked in my post, and none whatsoever in yours.
Thanks for the discussion.

 

I will only point out that the ole Calvinist favorite that "You don't scripture argument!" seems a bit juvenile such as reliance on meaningless rhetorical question begging in light of your avoidance of the issues in this debate or when I did use scripture along with reasoning of why my interpretations were logically correct, and including and especially your neglect to recognize and address this issue:

 

Actually one could use a whole slew of scriptures and the other party doesn't use any and they can be the one RIGHT. I've seen Calvinist roll out 10-20 scriptures and EVERYONE they force and faulty interpretation on the verse and another might merely be trying to get the Calvinists to obey accepted rules of Biblical interpretation with not even one scripture and they can be the one who is right! If you doubt this look at the cults. If you've studied you know they can roll out large bulk of Bible verses none of which validate their claims