Search results

What?! I'm the one showing the distinctions between the various Calvinistic views on the atonement, yet you accuse me of denying they exist??? If there are differences among Calvinists, which we BOTH agree there are, then why don't you acknowledge that difference with regard to the various...

Which is why I'm now acknowledging your efforts, which have been all the more effective. Thanks! :applause: Stop pretending Luke, no one is buying it. We all know this has been a point of contention among Calvinists such a Baxter, Shedd, AA Hodge, C Hodge and others. Just acknowledge the...

No its not, not according to scholarly Calvinists. The atonement alone is not efficacious within the Calvinistic system. If the atonement alone was efficacious then there wouldn't be the need for regeneration (irresistible call). And you accuse me of misrepresenting Calvinism? Well, Calvin...

Allow me to quote from another Reformer who even more clearly defines this particular view of the atonement: "The mere fact that Jesus Christ made satisfaction for human sin, alone and of itself, will save no soul. Christ, conceivably, might have died precisely as he did, and his death have...

So, you agree that the atonement is sufficient for the salvation of all mankind, right? What does that mean to you? Does that mean is it merely valuable enough to be sufficient if indeed Christ had chosen to atone for the sins of everyman OR does that mean it is actually sufficient for the...

I can't disagree with your so called case against me? I think Steve and others have shown that you do more harm to the Calvinistic case than I have ever done with the manner in which you address people. What does Hodge mean when he writes: "What was demanded for the salvation of one was...

Put up or hush up. Blanket unfounded accusation don't fly here. Quote me and show how I've misrepresented Calvinism. Make sure you tell us which branch of Calvinism (Supra, Infra, Amyr, etc) that I've misrepresented and why. Good, then stop pretending like you all agree on this point and...

Yet earlier you argued that it was sufficient for those who would be saved. Hmmmm Luke, what do you think "sufficient" means? It doesn't mean that it is valuable enough to be sufficient, you know? It means that it has removed all legal impediments thus making the atonement "available" to...

Ok, never mind Luke, you are probably right. All those papers, debates, and volumes of works devoted to this distinction among various Calvinistic scholars is probably just a figment of my imagination.... :rolleyes:

Consider this quote from Hodge, which actually deals with the topic at hand: It is therefore, in its nature, adapted to ALL SINNERS who are under that law…The righteousness of Christ, therefore, consisting in the obedience and death demanded by the law under which all men are placed, is...

Glf, you argue as if I'm attempting to prove these men aren't Reformed in their soteriology, when in reality I'm only presenting various nuances and differences in their approach regarding Christ's atonement. I have said time and again that they are "Calvinists," and the fact that you seem to...

Ok, but is that all that is keeping them from being saved? OR is there something else besides their unbelief that prevents them from salvation...like maybe there sins have not been atoned? Has the legal impediments been removed (as AA Hodge says), or haven't they? Is unbelief the only reason...

Yes, really. You have no substance here, just personal attacks. Deal with my content and if you think I am taking them out of context, show it. It should be real simple for you to disprove my points here if that is the case. What is evident is that you would rather besmirch me than discuss...

I think it is clear that I have better represented the nuances of what Calvin and many Calvinistic scholars have taught than you or any other "Calvinist" on this board. As MacArthur has said, "I am troubled by the tendency of some - often young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine -...

:applause: I still don't know how some interpret God's ability to stop sin with His determination of it. I guess since I knew my children would sin before deciding to have children means I determined them to sin?

Sure, his context matters. I have provided quotes which suggest he takes the Calvinistic approach by which God provides all that is needed for the salvation of all men, but only effectually calls (regenerates) the elect. Have you provided one quote to counter that view? No. Have you provided...

Your 'defense' was to merely claim that other comments and context suggests that he doesn't mean what he said, but you don't provide any other quotes or context to support your claims. You just simply say that it there and expect us to take your word for it. That is not a defense. It's...

Just as I suspected, you turn to ad hominem instead of providing a defense for your views. Typical. Have a great day.

:thumbs: Well stated. It only becomes confusing when people attempt to conform the scriptures to fit their pet dogma.

You are honestly arguing that Calvin meant, ""As no [elect] man is excluded from calling upon God, the gate of salvation is set open to all [elect] men; neither is there any other thing which keepeth us [the elect] back from entering in, save only our own unbelief." ??? Really? Do you want...