Logical Inconsistency?

Sorry.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Doulous.
You wrote:

I agree with your assessment of the two schools of thought except for where you wrote "His choice is always his own and is not predicated on any work of God."

Actually, at least myself, believes that the choice is God's. And God does draw the person, but the prospective believer must believe willingly.

Romans 1 is clear that God gives some light of His existence to every person. And John 3:19-20 says that Light has come into the world, but men chose not to come to the light because they love their sin. Not because they can't come to Jesus.

I believe that one choses to believe with some degree of faith, and then regeneration fulfills that faith. Like the man that said "I believe help me mine unbelief" in Mark 9:24.

Scripture says:

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and
also to the Greek."

Not believeth to every one that is saved. Romans 10:10 says that you believe unto righteousness.

Hebrews 11:6 says that to come to God you must believe first. Romans 4:3 says that Abraham believed and is was counted to him as righteousness. Gal. 3:2 says that you received the Spirit by hearing and believing. Not the other way around.

Honestly, I don't know where Calvinists came up with this doctrine of regeneration before believing.

 

I take offense with the use of the word logical whether you say conclusion or extreme. There is nothing logical in not obeying the commands of God. To say that Hyper-Calvanism is an extreme of Calvanism, that I could agree with..... but is an illogical extreme because it goes against the Word of God.

 

Logic is a fine thing so long as you have exhaustive knowledge of the premises. But if there's something you don't know, logic gets wobbly.

Take the standard syllogism: all men are mortal/ Socrates is a man/ therefore Socrates is mortal. Is it true that all men are mortal? Is "the man Christ Jesus" mortal?

You cannot justifiably make a statement such as "a Calvinist is inconsistent unless he believes X" because you cannot know the details of his other beliefs. You're proceeding upon a string of suppositions. Every doctrine has its nuances. Don't believe me? Read two theology books.

People who disagree with me are, by definition, in error; but that doesn't make them illogical or unintelligent.

 

If Christ had simply been a man, then yes, he would have been mortal. He was, however, more than a mere man. He is God incarnate. This places him above humanity.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I agree.

"Predestination" doesn't come in "various degrees", it's 100%.

 

doulos said:

I had already made the correction.

Noted. Nonetheless:

Let me rephrase. If Calvinism is carried to it's logical extreme it will result in hyper-Calvinism. The emphasis is on "logical extreme."

I still disagree. Hyper-Calvinism is an extreme, but it is not the logical extreme. Sound logic does not ignore relevant evidence (e.g. the Calvinist belief in duty-faith) that militates against the conclusion.

 

You mind if we chew on this statement?

You start off by saying that "the choice is God's." Okay, so far so good. You would be invited to my next meeting of the "Calvinist Society." What I am looking for in your statement is whether we define terms the same way. If so, we should be golden. If not, where does the breakdown occur? A question to ask about God's choice: can God's choice be thwarted by man? Or to put it another way, if God decides to do something can man interfere with God's decision? </font>[/QUOTE]2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that "ALL" should come to repentance.

Mt 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

Clearly, God's "Will" is not being "enforced".

Mt 22:14 For many ARE called, but few are chosen.

"IF' God made a difference in the calling, "Effectual", "IN-effectual", the above statement would not be "true" and a lie.

The problem with this is the fact that faith in Jesus is the door through which everyone must pass "Before" they receive "Regeneration", faith is that part of being saved that God requires of man before he will save, calvinist has this sequence "Backwards".

Man is "dead in sin", because he can't pay the wages of sin, (death), but he isn't so totally depraved that he doesn't know/recognize "good/evil", God's call/law makes man aware of sin, and the choice to repent/continue in sin is the reason why there is a "judgment day" coming where God will judge man according to those choices man made,

Predestination eliminates God's judgment of man's choices, since man could not be held responsible for those choices.

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?

Faith doesn't follow salvation,

Salvation follows faith,

Faith in Jesus comes before salvation.


Joh 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

The "Spirit" of God will not come into a person unless it is "Welcomed", Jesus only "knocks" on the door, sovereign will doesn't force the door open.

Re 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Jesus dying for the sins of the whole world would have been rather useless unless the whole world was exposed to that light, would it not??


The many who are called but not chosen "Loved" the darkness rather than the light, and the reason why they were not chosen, they refused to "open the door" for Jesus/spirit to come in and save, therefore God is justified to condemn both them and the choice they made.

The "evil" of man is the body of flesh in which he is born, but his "consciousness" is still aware of "good/evil", totally depravity would eliminate man's ability to recognize "Good" or a God.

Ro 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

One "evil thought" and you become just as much a sinners as Adolf Hitler, so all have sinned.

The flesh can't follow the law to prefection, but through "FAITH" in Jesus, the consciousness can.

Ro 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

1Co 2:16 But we have the mind of Christ.

Calvin doctrine ties the sins of the flesh, with the consciousness of man, making the conscience as sinful as the flesh, but the flesh seek only to fulfil it's lust (evil) while the conscience seeks both "good and evil".

Ro 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing:

for to "WILL" (consciousness) is present with me;

but how to perform that which is good I find not. (can't fufill the law)

"Totally depravity" of flesh, YES, of the conscience, NO, the reason why death is once appointed to all flesh, but not to souls.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

What's the condemnation of evil men, it's not predestination, but the fact that they saw the light and rejected it, just as Israel did, and just like Israel, if they had accepted Jesus, then Jesus would have accept/saved them, he died for he sin of the whole world that they "might be" saved, what applies to Israel, applies to the church, the plan of salvation doesn't change.

You don't know the story of Abraham very well, he planned to go back home walking/talking with Isaac after he killed him, and God didn't reveal that to Abraham, "BY FAITH" he figured that out.

Me either.

 

Oh goody, just what we need, another Calvin/Armenian debate.

 

And thus begins the tedious process of defining terms in order to attain an exhaustive knowledge of the premises, as I originally stated. Was the original premise "all mortal men are mortal" or was it "all men are mortal"?

How about Moses? Is he a man, or is he not? Here we go again . . .

My original statement can be a helpful corrective to the "logic demands" accusations that fly so freely in theological disputes. "If you believe A, then you must believe B." One thing may seem to imply another, but the implication is seldom necessary because the premises are inherently ambiguous most of the time.

"Logic" demands that honest, smart, and educated theologians all agree in toto with God's word. But only I and a few others actually do.

Logic is a fine thing when you have exhaustive knowledge of the premises. But since we don't, logic usually only points toward promising lines of investigation, and closes off those lines which reveal themselves to be untenable.

 

doulous,
thanks for correcting the spelling. and yes, i have seen your debates and notice you lose most all of them.

 

Doulous.
You wrote

Do you believe that God has called at least one regenerated in the last 2,000 years to a certain call to ministry and that person said no to it?

Since you only answer can be yes, then your understand of the sovereignty of God and the will of man falls short of understanding.

And since regenerated man has obviously said no to the sovereignty of God, how much more so the unregenerate. Ever read Rom. 8:14?

So then to better understand how our will works into the full decision of God to regenerate a person, I would argue that He chooses one's that (I don't know why I have keep saying this) He knows are fearing Him and their future outcome and want to repent, thereby having to believe His Word, and they are putting their trust in Christ based on believing the Biblical account of the Gospel.

And BTW, it is only really His full decision to make available this salvation since only can forgive the sin debt on His terms, and only He has the power to regenerate a person. But God never violates the will. Why? Because that is the way that He wanted it since He first created both the angels and man.

One third of the angels rebelled of their own free will, and two thirds did not. God did not come out one day and say that He was interested in some competition so He was going to pick two teams. One His and the other Satan's.

You wrote

Eph. 2 does say that man is dead, but he is not brain dead. Rather he is spiritually dead. And I would argue that 1 Cor. 2:14 more applies to the deeper things of God's Word. Anyone can understand the Gospel. And I believe that God knows the heart, and He will give the light necessary when the person is contrite and trembles at His Word (Isa. 66:2).

Observe these lyrics written by two, and I would have to agree with you on this, totally depraved souls:

Saint of Me

They know full well where they are going when they die, and how to avoid it.

I agree with you that this aspect of whether or not one is regenerated just before belief or the other way around is a moot point for the one that is saved. But it is an important point when giving the Gospel.

I would have to say that precious few give the Calvinist version when giving someone the Gospel. I brought up this fact with a Calvinist deacon at my former church and he responded with "Well, we just don't tell then that."

Why is ashamed of his belief system. Even Evangelism Explosion, put together by a Calvinist, uses the Arminian version of presenting the Gospel. I know, I took the course.

Here are some outline questions from page 127 called "Fourteen transitional Sentences" given after they are given the Gospel.

From Christ to Faith: "This gift is received by faith." (Not the other way around BTW)

Transition: "Does this make sense to you?" (How does that square with total depravity?)

Commitment: "Would you like to receive the gift of eternal life?" (a decision of course)

Clarification: "Let me clarify this." (Again, where is the total depravity?)

Prayer: "If that's what you really want, I can lead us in prayer and we can tell God what you just told me." (Yes, he did say "If that's what you really want")

Why do you suppose that Calvinists, when giving the Gospel, always give the Arminian version of the Gospel?

And better yet, why do so many people get saved by it?

You closed with:

But the Scripture in three places (Gen. 15; Rom. 4; Gal. 3) clearly says that he got saved when he believed in God after leaving Haran. Why doesn't Paul site Gen. 12 instead of Gen 15 in Galatians and Romans?

 

Mt 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

Mt 12:34 for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

 

Doulous.
One of us is a bit confused; possibly both of us. You wrote:

But my answer was directed by this statement of yours that contradicts the above statement:

I don't see how you can reconcile both statements, but I must say that I agree with your first statement on this post.

You wrote:

It is quite obvious that you don't understand what mercy is. Just because man fears God, that doesn't mean that he deserved mercy. I looked up the definition and it states that; to be worthy, fit, or suitable for some reward or requital. No one would argue that if we cry out for mercy and honor His Son by putting our faith and trust in Him that we would be worthy of salvation.

And of course you would have to be wrong or exactly no Arminians in 2,000 years would ever be saved. Not one person can ever be saved by a faith + works false salvation. Could you argue that John Wesley was not saved? Or Baptists that held to conditional election such as Adrian Rogers or Charles Stanley?

You wrote this concerning 1 Cor. 2:14:

You reject what I wrote out of hand because you use of the text is that of a Calvinist proof-text taken out of context. Observe:

But God hath revealed them (plural) unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. (does that sound like only the Gospel?)
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things (again, plural) of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit
which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Stop here. Here Paul is talking to Christians about the things that the Holy Spirit teaches us after we have believed the Gospel. So he could not have been talking about the Gospel.

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual
things with spiritual." 1 Cor. 2:10-13

Again, deep matters from Scripture that Christians learn after having heard and believed the Gospel, not the Gospel itself.

I agree with the verses that you sited that state that God darkens the heart of the proud, but He gives grace to the humble. The humble will be contrite and tremble at His Word thereby receiving the light of the Gospel and His grace and mercy.

You closed with:

You say that salvation requires a human response. I agree, but John Calvin does not. Remember your previous argument for total depravity using Eph. 2?

Here are some interesting verses:

Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word:
But murmured in their tents, and hearkened not unto the voice of the LORD.
Therefore (notice the sequence of events here) He lifted up His hand against them, to overthrow them in the wilderness: Ps. 106:24-26

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and
live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Ez. 33:11

These verses are types of the sacrifice of Christ and our requirement:

"If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD." Lev. 1:4

And will make an offering by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, or a sacrifice in performing a vow, or in a freewill offering, or in your solemn feasts, to make a sweet savor unto the LORD, of the herd or of the flock: Num. 15:3