Some Pebbles For Arminians To Chew

In response to these questions I say yawn...

But I will start out in answering the first three questions in order to show just how one sided they really are.

1. Can a man have free will and God be sovereign ?

Yes, since it was God's sovereign will for us to be free moral agents. That is why He is angry when we sin.

2. If all sinners will and power to come to Christ , why did Christ say , " No man can come unto me except the Father which hath sent me draw him ? " ( John 6:44 )

Because He said in Isa. 66:2 that He will look to people that tremble at His Word and are sorry ('contrite') over their sins. We see this example in Luke 18 with the publican and the Pharisee. God's gives grace to the humble and resists the proud as any Christian knows.

If God is sovereign in the Calvinistic sense, then God is also the Author of our pride since we can not have a will toward pride either. Of course that is not so as is written in James 1:13-16.

3. Has any man the power to refuse to come to Christ when the Father draws him ?

Why would we? We have already agreed to His decision. I agree that God makes the dynamic decision, but God never violates our will. If you don't think so, then why don't all born again believers, who are led by the Spirit BTW (Rom. 8:14), obey His will to the fullest extent AFTER conversion? (see 1 John 1:8-10 if you are lame enough to believe that you do)

Of course all of these slanted, ridiculous questions could be answered biblically if one was to waste his time in doing so. ANd also two can play that game.

Here are 11 such questions aimed at the Calvinist:

1. It is often said by Calvinists that dead men can't respond. As you say, "you are dead in your trespasses & sins." Eph. 2:1.

In Romans 6, it says that "in the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus."

If being dead in sin means one can't respond to God then does being dead to sin mean that the Christian cannot respond to sin?


2. Even though God does perfectly know all human thoughts, can man have thoughts that have never been thought before (i.e. ex-nihilo thoughts)?

If these thoughts are not free (e.g., they are determined) then has God caused all thoughts, including evil ones, which would make God the author of sin and evil and man not responsible?

If, on the other hand, these thoughts are free, then how can God remain sovereign according to the Calvinist definition of sovereignty?


3. The Bible says in 1 Timothy 2:4, "God our Savior wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth."

It also states that God wants all men to be saved in 2 Peter 3:9, Matthew 23:37 and in Ezekiel 33:11 and 18:30. Obviously not all men are saved.

How does Calvinism explain this? Does the God of Calvinism have two wills that are in direct contradiction and hence have a multiple personality disorder?


4. Calvinism excludes individual faith from the salvation process, classifying such faith as a work.

How can Calvinists classify faith as a work when Paul specifically excludes faith from works in Romans 3:27-28 and 4:5?


5. Jonah 2:8 says that "those who cling to worthless idols forfeit the grace that could be theirs."

If, as Calvinism teaches, God determined before time began who would be reprobates, and therefore does not extend the grace to them by which they could be saved, how logically can we understand this verse's statement that these reprobates, "forfeited the grace that could be theirs.?"


6. The Bible says in John 6:44, "no one can come to me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." The same word "draw" is used in John 12:32 which says, "But I, when I am lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto myself." Matthew 23:37 says that men can resist God's will.

How do you answer this problem in Calvinism?


7. You say that even the "good" acts of sinners are "bad" because they come from a completely depraved nature. Is it a "bad" act to rationally apprehend the truthfulness of apologetics?

If so, why has God commanded us to practice apologetics to sinners, which causes them to do a bad act? Doesn't that mean that God causes sinners' bad acts?

If you say "yes," doesn't that make God a bad guy?


8. When Calvinism is shown to have logical contradictions, Calvinists usually reply that God's thoughts are unsearchable, and therefore the logical problems that Calvinism has, for example divine election and human responsibility, exhaustive sovereignty and human free will, and God's having two contradictory wills, are solved by invoking the phrase, "well that's a mystery."

If you can solve your logic problems by copping out with the term mystery, why can't the Arminian types, atheists and others pull the same move?


9. The Bible says in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 that reprobates "perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved."

From your Calvinistic worldview, how can it logically be said that a reprobate refuses to love the truth and so be saved, when your God determines that the reprobate can't love the truth, can't be saved, and therefore doesn't refuse God at all?


10. You have said that nothing thwarts the will of God, and you also have said that a man's will cannot be free or else God would not be absolutely sovereign.

Doesn't this mean that God determines (or is the cause of) evil and the evil acts of men for his sovereign pleasure?


11. In Romans 9 where God says, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy" why do you automatically assume that God does not want to have mercy on all but only have mercy on the select few when God clearly tells us in Romans 11:32 that, "God has bound all men over to disobedience so that He may have mercy on them all?"

If you say that all means all classes of men, but not all men in every class, then why does it not mean all classes of men but not all men in every class in Romans 3:23 where it says, "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God?"

Does this mean some have not sinned? Perhaps, for instance, the Virgin Mary?

http://answers.org/theology/calvinism.html

Here are five more:

Why preach ‘repent or perish’ when the non-elect can’t repent and the elect can’t perish?

How can God hold the non-elect responsible for ‘not believing’ and damn them for it, when He deliberately did not give them the faith to enable them to believe in the first place? (see Romans 1)

If Christ has already made an efficacious atonement for the sins of an elect person, is that elect person actually lost during the period prior to their being saved?

During the period before an elect person gets saved, how are they condemned already (for not believing) when their unbelief (which is a sin) has already been paid for by Christ on the cross?

If repentance is a gift only given to the elect, what did Jesus mean when He said that some of the people in hell would have repented if they had had the same opportunity as the people to whom He preached?

Why does the Spirit of God strive and convict some sinners who later prove, by dying and going to hell, that they were non-elect? What is the purpose of such movings of the Spirit?

http://www.biblebc.com/some_serious_questions_for_calvi.htm

Now isn't this fun?

 

In other words, if you knew, you would label me. Thanks but no thanks.

I don't fit any labels because my beliefs are based on the Bible and don't fall neatly into any man-made category that is being discussed here.

I think salvation is a mystery and we can't know its workings. We have God in the OT and Jesus in the NT telling us to believe, saying things like, "Choose this day whom you shall serve," and we have the verse that no man comes to the Father unless he's drawn and that we are chosen by God from the beginning.

When I said earlier, or maybe on another thread, that the Bible does not divide believers this way, I meant the Bible does not divide believers into Calvinist-Arminian camps. Nor are we supposed to say things like, "I am of Cephas," "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," etc.

But this seems to be happening here and on other threads. If this keeps up, I may have to seriously consider leaving the BB because these Calvinist-Arminian discussions are taking over. I did not join the BB almost 2 yrs. ago for this kind of divisiveness. It's beyond just disagreement, imo.

 

"I believe all time and chance has happened to all men."

Bro Bob, just for clarification, do you mean "chance" as in "opportunity", or do you mean "chance" as in "it might happen, it might not"?

 

If you were clear about what you believe, you would end up labeling yourself.

In other words, you're right and everyone else is wrong. So, you're a Marciaite? All these "man-made categories" are just how people have interpreted what the Bible says. Everyone has some kind of category, even if it is one they have made up. You must not like theology, because that is what we are talking about.

I agree with everything you just said.

Only because Calvin and Arminius had not yet been born

Had nothing to do with theological camps trying to identify what they believed. Had everything to do with spiritual pride. I hope you don't think I am being proud. I am not trying to be. I am a sinner saved by grace who is struggling to understand God. When I learn something, I want others to know.

By this, Paul didn't mean to throw out all theological and doctrinal belief so that we could wrap our arms around each other. If you read the rest of 1 Corinthians you will see that it is all about him correcting their doctrinal and practical errors.

This is a "Baptist Theology and Bible Study DEBATE Forum." I am sorry if you can't stomach debate. Debate doesn't mean we hate each other. I plan on seeing everyone here in heaven and, with them, praising our Lord and Savior for eternity. We may disagree here on earth. And one day in heaven, we are all going to find out the truth. Until we get there, we will continue to debate these things.

 

Now hold on just a cotton pickin' minute. Where in TULIP do you find that not all babies are in Heaven? Lots of Calvinists believe that all babies are in Heaven, from Spurgeon to Al Mohler to Calvibaptist all the way down to me.

 

Hi Marcia,

Do you think that we don't base our beliefs on the Bible? Do you think Arminians don't base their beliefs on the Bible. We all follow what we think the Bible says. I doubt any of us get it all right.

 

CalviBaptist,

yes this is a debate forum, but Baptist Theology and Bible Study are not completely made up of Calvinism versus Arminianism. We used to have a forum specifically for that debate, but it was shut down due to the nastiness that occurred on a regular basis there. Now all thats happened is ya'all have come in here and either taken over every ongoing discussion and turned it into a C vs. A discussion, OR you start threads ad infinitum on the subject, trying to force even the most obscure topics into a debate over Calvinism.

I say you, not only meaning the general sense, but you in specific, from what Ive seen. I think quite a few of us are starting to get a tad annoyed.

 

Ditto to what bapmom said.

 

CalviBaptist, I can stomach debate quite well. I'm just peeved and bored by all this constant Calvinist-Arminian stuff. It's not really debate, it's the same ol' stuff round and round - from both sides -- all the time. There is nothing new here at all, nothing edifying. It's just people dividing each other into camps.

This thread used to be interesting when we stuck to realy doctrinal stuff, but now it's turning into a Calvinist-Arminian forum. I don't considre that doctrinal stuff so much as labeling since there is no biblical authority to label people Calvinist or Arminian.

And I do know what I believe, and no, I do not fit a label like the ones used here.

 

J.D.
opportunity

 

So what do you think about music styles?

(Just kidding.)

I've tried to post on a couple of other topics, but I usually get very few replies. Maybe I just pick boring topics, but it seems like not many people want to talk theology apart from the C/A stuff.

I suggest that you try to start threads on other topics, and if C/A creeps in call people on it.

 

Amen to you then Whatever but I have heard it preached in my life time by the Calvinists and have a letter published by a Calvinists that they do believe there will be babies in Hell.

 

I came onto this board specifically because I saw quite a few posts that completely misrepresented my view and what I believe the Bible teaches. I have created certain posts because of the issues brought up in other threads that I thought needed a specific post. I have also posted on threads that had absolutely nothing to do with Calvinism or Arminianism. If you don't like these threads on Calvinism-Arminianism, why do you read them? There are many other current threads that have nothing to do with the subject.

And I agree with you about a few things. There is no need for every thread to either be about or end up in a debate about Calvinism-Arminianism. Unfortunately, you are right, some of us get into a state where we have a one-track mind sometimes. For that I apologize. The other thing you are right about is that there is no reason for things to degrade into ugliness.

 

Marcia has a point. It does seem to just go around and around, same Scripture after same Scripture and I know you not going to change me and I doubt if I will change you from believing what you do and I mean C and A. I am somewhere in between. Calvibaptist gave me a label but really don't think it fits. I think a little more highly of myself than "confused". Anyway He has never been able to change any of our veiws on the Bible.

 

Some Calvinists do believe that, but not all.

 

I know a free willer who believes Jesus is a time traveller. I'm not kidding. I've also heard a free-willer preacher accept the idea of reincarnation.

Okay, now that we've gotten that out of our systems, what difference does it make?

 

I believe you. I am not a free-willer but I have brethren in our association who preach a lot of stuff I don't believe and I am sure you do too. Most of it I don't even call preaching.

But what you said does give me a laugh because I have heard some weird things in my life.

 

I recall witnessing to a waitress many years ago, and she said she believed in Christ, but also believed that the Gospel message was reincarnation. She just kept repeating "you must be born again". I tried to explain to her that the literal translation is "born from above". But she would hear none of it. To her, that was the entire Bible. "You must be born again". And again. And again....

 

You are wrong. Check out the total depravity threads. I don't remember a single free willer who reponded in those threads who believes in total depravity. Just look at all the threads where free willers insist that the fall made us spiritually sick but not spiritually dead. That's just another way of denying total depravity. It assumes that we're able to respond without first having to be quickened because we're not totally spiritually dead. </font>[/QUOTE]With all due respect Myself and others merely pted out where your definition of depravity lacked bible backing. And sinners are referred to as sick also so what is your real issue?

 

Okay, then just answer this question. Did God create man such that, without any further assistance beyond how he is created, man is able to accept and believe the Gospel of his own free will?