confused about Calvin

[/b] Two options here. One, "world" means everyone as you assert and since Jesus was given so that the "world" would not be condemned... no one will be condemned.

Two, you are wrong about the implications of "world". For instance, you might say "I agree with the Baptists. That would not mean that you agreed with every single Baptist.

As a caveat though, Christ death won general grace as well. The world is not destroyed because He accepted the cross. In order for God to redeem the elect, He must show mercy and grace toward the "world" as a whole. The rains fall on the just and the unjust. [/b]</font>[/QUOTE]You deny that salvation is offer to "ALL", a clear contradiction of "EVERYTHING" the Bible teaches about God, Jesus, and the plan of salvation, us being saved because we "BELIEVE", or "OUR FAITH", other condemned because they "don't believe".

Like the rain, (water, Jesus gave woman at well) if the "earth" (Body of flesh) will drink in this "Water" it will produce fruit, but if the "Earth" is "Hard" (hearted) then the water just runs off, the "earth" (body) is "barren".

Heb 6:7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:

8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.

9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Neither you, or John, have demonstrated a "Spiritual understanding" of scripture, but then if ya'll did, we wouldn't have anything to "debate", would we???

 

Nope. There is a general call but it isn't specifically the gospel. That is both biblical and self-evident. Not everyone hears the gospel. Everyone does see the general revelation of God in nature and they also have the witness of their own conscience. Men could be saved by righteousness if they would only choose to obey the Law leaving God nothing to condemn them for... but they won't thus they are guilty and have no RIGHT to anything other than condemnation.

BTW, you should read my responses rather continually repeating the same false charges. I gave a similar answer not long ago citing Romans 1 and 2.

Nope. Salvation as in a direct gospel appeal was never offered to all... not in the day of Christ and not now. People have died for the last 2000+ years without hearing the gospel but being rightly condemned to hell for their sin.

If you disagree, show me biblical proof otherwise.

Nope. We do believe and we do have faith. Those things are necessary for salvation.

The condemned are so not just because they don't believe but because they are yet in their sins. It doesn't take an active choice not to believe to be condemned... It only requires that a person be a sinner. They are "condemned already".

Of course the crux is "why". Why do some believe while others do not. I believe the Bible clearly declares that God performs a miraculous work of regeneration of a "dead" sinner thus freeing him to repent, believe, and possess saving faith.

You believe that somehow the process is begun by an independent "good will" act of man. That simply isn't justified by scripture.

 

No. If we were listening to whatever spirit it is that is telling you to ignore contradictions between your belief and scripture... we would not be having this debate.

As it is, you still haven't answered my questions nor have you directly addressed any of my responses with anything other than non-sense like your words above. Words that pretty much amount to its true because "you say so".

Sorry but that isn't good enough. God didn't tell me to find you and let you tell me the truth... He didn't tell me to listen to some feeling or fleshly impulse. He told me to submit and search the scriptures. That is what I am attempting to do.

If you give a good, scriptural reason for believing as you do, I will listen. I switched from your position. If shown something that accounts for all of scripture and does a better job than the belief loosely called calvinism... then I'll change again.

Judging from what you've done so far... I won't hold my breath.

 

Why should I read calvin, or anyone else, God's word isn't in Calvins book but "God's book", the Bible, KJV.

Scripture backup those verses in that God isn't "WILLING" for any to perish, you have to "twist scripture" to get to calvins doctrine.

God doesn't create anything that is "less than perfect", so how did these "Vessels" become "fit for destruction", God's work or man's??

Calvin says they were created for no other purpose than to be "Damned", just so God can "Show off" how "BAD" he can be for his "glory",

I'd "SPIT" in that "god's face", and I do, every day, the "god" that won't open the doors of his prison to set his captives free is the "DEVIL", but evidently calvin didn't know that.

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Isa 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Isa 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Isa 42:7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.

Zec 9:11 As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water.

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive,

Ps 102:19 For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD behold the earth;

20 To hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death;

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Calvin denies that "FREEDOM" from sins captivity is offered to "ALL",

but its only appointed ONCE for man to die, the "SECOND DEATH" is not APPOINTED BY GOD to "ANYONE".

As I've said, Calvin's doctrine is very "narrow", "shallow", "milk drinker" understanding of scripture, there's no "DEPTH" of understanding.

1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

 

</font>[/QUOTE][/qb] Where did this come from? I didn't write it!

 

Actually if you read God's book and accepted all of it as true then endeavored to conform your beliefs to it... you wouldn't believe what you do. You cannot accommodate verses that directly ascribe our salvation to God's predestining and electionl. Instead, you try to evade... and claim that as spiritual...

 

Oh... and btw, it is blatantly dishonest to represent someone's views if you have never actually read that person's views.

I don't really care what Calvin said. The doctrine of calvinism shares his conclusions by and large... but not necessarily his arguments. But you have preoccupied yourself with what Calvin did... as if it were some kind of effective slur towards us.

 

Hello Me4Him.

Did God command love or not Me4Him?

john.

 

Scripture backup those verses in that God isn't "WILLING" for any to perish, you have to "twist scripture" to get to calvins doctrine.</font>[/QUOTE] No. You simply have to read with Spirit guided discernment.

Can man thwart the perfect will of God? Is God a simply a slave to His foreknowledge or does He really have foreknowledge according to you?

My answe is simple and has been given at least once or twice before. If God were unwilling for any to perish in the sense that you interpret this verse then the only consistent conclusion would be universalism. If God didn't permit them to perish willfully... then they wouldn't perish.

God doesn't create anything that is "less than perfect", so how did these "Vessels" become "fit for destruction", God's work or man's??</font>[/QUOTE] Neither and both. God created man with the ability to choose between God and sin/self. Man as represented by Adam chose sin. We as individuals choose sin over God.

God however is not guilty for creating us as He did though He knew beforehand that we all would rebel in sin.

BTW, why don't you start answering some of these issues rather than evading by asking questions. YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS I ASKED BEFORE AND YOU STILL HAVEN'T RECONCILED ROMANS 9 WITH JOHN 3 BY THE SYSTEM YOU BELIEVE IN.

Matter of factly, I think you are avoiding because you can't reconcile all of scripture to your view. You have this presupposition about man's goodness, free will, and authority to demand "rights" of God... and won't give it up even in the face of directly contradictory scripture.

There are non-calvinists who make a good effort at answering questions like I ask. I find them unconvincing but at least they are honest enough to try then modify their view to one degree or another. You aren't.

You walk a dangerous line. I am sure that God is not pleased with your flippant attitude.

The fact is that God does ordain each human life. He does so knowing that they will all be sinners worthy of condemnation. He does so knowing those He will redeem. He knows that those who continue in their sin will be damned. And finally, yes, it will give God glory to righteously judge those who have rebelled and sinned against Him while also giving Him glory to show grace towards those who are likewise unworthy.

No. Rather calvinism would say perhaps that all men are content in their bondage to sin. God rescues some but let's the others continue exactly as they please.

If a governor pardons a guilty prisoner, that doesn't entitle every other prisoner to a pardon or even the opportunity for a pardon.

Coming from someone whose view is so far removed from answering all of scripture... but apparently thinks it does, that can only be counted as a compliment.

You are self-indicting. There is nothing in this verse that says the Spirit will lead you to ignore scripture that contradicts your predetermined belief about what scripture MUST say.

 

But "YOU" haven't answer the question, "WHY" was the tree of knowledge, and "CHOICE" given to Adam, both had a "purpose", now explain it.

You either can't/won't answer mine.

I know which God I worship, and it's not the one who keep his captives "prisoner", my God set men "FREE".

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Yes, but you say they have no choice between being redeemed/condemnation, "Wrong".

Paul said he wasn't "content", he possess the "WILL" but not the "means", and what about the "young man" who had kept all the commandment but still "lacked" something, was he content with sin, he was still in bondage.

Calvin doctrine about man's attitude toward sin doen't match what the scripture say.

It does if they are all guilty of the same crime (sin) and someone (Jesus) is willing to "pay their fine" for them.

You can't with-hold "JUSTICE" because of "Personal predilection", that's a "Kangaroo Court", run by a "DISHONEST JUDGE",

Jesus died for the sins of the "Whole world", and it would be a "slap in the face" of Jesus by the
"JUDGE" to with-hold his offer to pay their fine, especially after he already died to pay that fine.

Your "effectual callin" is also denied by this.


God told man what the "wages of sin" were, then told man how to avoid having to pay those wages himself, "Belief in Jesus".

God's only interested is having the law fulfilled, death for sin, Jesus did that, for the whole world, God's will is that no one else should die. (perish)

I'd suggest learning how the law functions.

Let me interpret it for ya.

The "Deep things", like Parables, are only understood by those who have "Ears to hear", "Eyes to see",

in other words, there more information in a verse that just the words you see on paper.

My beliefs don't come by reading other men books, and neither are they "predetermined", I have to given an account of every word someday, and I have enough "fear/respect" for God that if they are not "his words", I might "catch hell".

Quite obviously, not all have that same "Fear/respect".

 

Hello Me4Him.

Did God command love or not Me4Him?

john.

 

Mt 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Yep, and whomever I "Love" is a "CHOICE" made by "MY WILL", not God's,

therefore I can "BREAK" God's Commandments, or "OPPOSE" God's "WILL" that I Love him.

Jos 24:15 choose you this day whom ye will serve;

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Calvinism is a good example of how one verse in the scripture (Ro 9) can be misinterpreted and a whole different doctrine build around it that changes/denies everything else the scripture teaches.

A little leaven, leaven the whole,

The Bible/doctrine won't have any "contradiction" in them when correctly interpreted.

 

i've forgotten why i've been asking you i'll get back as soon as i remember.

so you say yes? yes? oh yea! Romans 9 is more than one verse.

i have an answer! thrown me right off

The Bible/doctrine won't have any "contradiction" in them when correctly interpreted.

one should not expose so much of one's throat

john.

 

But "YOU" haven't answer the question, "WHY" was the tree of knowledge, and "CHOICE" given to Adam, both had a "purpose", now explain it.</font>[/QUOTE] YES I HAVE. Read the responses once in awhile.

In brief, God gave man a choice and permitted Him to sin to accomplish His plan so that He might be glorified. Creation's purpose IS NOT the salvation of man... It IS for the glory of God.

You either can't/won't answer mine.</font>[/QUOTE] You are either not telling the truth or else not reading the responses.

In either case, this is a dishonest evasion tactic.

I know which God I worship, and it's not the one who keep his captives "prisoner", my God set men "FREE".</font>[/QUOTE] Yes He did. Those still captive to their sin nature remain lost. Those He frees accept Him as Savior.

Says nothing at all about you making a choice or freeing yourself does it?

Again, your cowardice is showing. You refuse to answer legitimate straight forward questions.

 

Two things Me4Him.
One, I forgot to thank you for explaining Tri-State. Thanks.
Two. I used to say that I would spit in God's face if He existed but that was before I became a Christian. The God you describe warrants pity.

john.

 

Paul said he wasn't "content", he possess the "WILL" but not the "means",</font>[/QUOTE] That was a SAVED Paul, not an unsaved Paul. Romans 7 deals with the struggle Christians have with sin in the flesh even after being indwelt by the Spirit. He didn't "possess" the will btw.

KJV- 18For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

NASB- 18For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.

Young's (sometimes beneficial if you wonder how much interpretation went into the English translation)- 18for I have known that there doth not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh, good: for to will is present with me, and to work that which is right I do not find,

Paul didn't take credit for that "will". He specifically used language that avoided taking credit for that "good will".

Yes. He was. He wanted to be affirmed and praised. He was coming to Christ to get Christ's approval that he had sufficiently saved himself.

Jesus looked through his facade seeing that sin of pride, materialism and self-glorification that he was very much contented with and asked him to give that up... He went away sorrowful.

He was willing to give up things that he was content not to do anyway. His pride was boosted by his self righteousness. But asking him to submit... exposed his true contentment with sin.

Self-reformers are very frequently moral and self-righteous. They are very content being lost since they think God will favor their honesty, values, ethics, good works, etc. They glory in those things... but doing "good" selfishly and/or for the glory of man is just as sinful as doing bad.

Still stuck on that goodness of man being prerequisite to salvation thing, huh? Basically what you are saying is that only if man is good enough to be discontented with sin will he accept salvation... That definitely does not match scripture.

It does if they are all guilty of the same crime (sin) </font>[/QUOTE] Nope. A pardon is an act of grace. It is not deserved nor is it a "right" either to the person who receives it or the one who doesn't.

JUSTICE demands that all human beings go to hell. They are condemned already.

God is most certainly sovereign no matter what you say over who He will regenerate/pardon. It is not dishonest in the least to give a gift to one person who doesn't deserve it but not another who likewise doesn't deserve it.

God is entitled to "personal predilection" anytime He so chooses... it is His opinion that matters first and most. It is not YOUR place to judge why He does what He does.

Stating that God does not have the right to choose according to His own good pleasure is not only unbiblical but blasphemous.

You still haven't answered my answer to this ridiculous line of reasoning.

If Jesus died to pay that fine... then that fine would be paid. Period. All go to heaven no matter what.

We both limit the extent of God's grace... at least I don't think you are a universalist but since you won't answer direct questions it is hard to tell.

Anyway, we differ on what limits that extention. You limit it to men who are good enough to make the right decision. I limit it (scripturally) to God's good pleasure.

That isn't what that verse says... It says the wages of sin is death... but the GIFT OF GOD is eternal life.

Get it ME? GIFT. Not opportunity to choose what's behind door 2... Certainly not the "right" to choose.... The GIFT.

In fact, I should thank you for reminding me of that passage since it expresses pretty much what I have been arguing for and you have been arguing against:

Romans 6:20For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. (Notice "free from"... ie had none)

21What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.

22But now being made free from sin, ("made" free... not chose to be free) and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. (The fruit comes after "being made..." ie. regenerated)

23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (not through your own good decision... through Jesus who won the redeemed's salvation on the cross)

Only those to whom God gives ears can hear and eyes can see... No one ever just chose not to be blind and became sighted. No one ever just chose to hear and lost their deafness.

No there isn't. There is depth required in understanding a verse, its interpretation in light of other scripture, and its application... but you do not have a license to add information to what God inspired based on some "spirit" led whim you have.

Yet you just claime the right to see more information in a verse than what God inspired.... that is not respect for His Word.

I won't attempt to guess where your beliefs came from except that they reflect an exalted view of man and his goodness.

Start with that beam in your own eye.

My one objective is to conform my interpretations and beliefs to what all of the relevant texts say... not to take a pen knife to those that contradict what I believe as you do.

 

Your beliefs reflect alot of humanism/modernism ME... and I am talking about the philosophies, not insults.

Darwin's first problem is that he refused to accept a God that wouldn't do things the way He thought was just and righteous. "A good God wouldn't create an animal with a digestive system that was not optimally perfect" for instance. He denied God the right to create the world as it pleased HIM. You deny God the right to extend grace by election according to His good pleasure.

Instead, you insist that he is unjust for doing so... just like Darwin thought nature reflected injustice it it were consciously created by God "as is".

 

God gets "Glory" out of condemning people to hell who had "NO CHOICE" in the matter??

What kind of "SICK MIND" would want to torture people, just because they can, and call it "Glory"???

God's "Glory" is in "Righteousness", not "Wickness".

 

God gets "Glory" out of condemning people to hell who had "NO CHOICE" in the matter??</font>[/QUOTE] There it is folks. Blatant dishonesty. READ... What was the very first thing I said?

God gets glory for righteously condemning those who sinned against Him.

The more you say stuff like this the more you indicate that you know little of the God of the Bible and have no respect for Him.

It is righteous when He punishes wickedness.

Of course this relates directly back to "none" being righteous... no, not one.

Praise God, He also gets glory from extending grace... based on His own righteousness, not that of sinful men.

 

AND YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS ME.