A ? 4 Calvinists (II)

[Aaron]

Why do you accept the "truth" of Calvinism while so many other believers throughout history didn't? Here I'll give you multiple choice:

1. Those "believers" who rejected Calvinism weren't really saved (elect).

2. Those believers who rejected Calvinism weren't as good (smart/humble etc) or were too sinful (prideful etc) to accept it. I on the other hand was better (smarter/humble) and didn't allow pride and sin to keep me from accepting this "truth." (Warning: you have just affirmed libertarian free will if you pick this option...and you have room to boast and take "glory" from God thus removing many Calvinistic definitions of "Sovereignty" )

3. Those believers who rejected Calvinism weren't chosen by God to understand Calvinism. They were given enough Grace to be saved, but not enough to understand correct soteriology. (Warning: If you choose this option you have to ponder the reason WHY God would deliberately hide the truth from some of his children while revealing it to others and why you would waste time attempting to convince non-Calvinists to convert to Calvinism considering that you don't have the command to convert people to Calvinistic soteriology but only the command to evangelize. After all the reason Calvinist say they are to evangelize is because "God told us to.")

So, which is it: 1, 2, or 3; Or add the correct answer if you don't believe I've provided all the options. Let's stay civil please. Thanks

God gives gifts, and gives to each severally as He will. Saying that one was "not chosen to understand Calvinism," is like saying one was not chosen to to have this gift or that gift. It isn't a slight on the part of God, but a lesson in love and humility for those who have the knowledge. Those who have the knowledge didn't give it to themselves, nor were they given it because they were worthy of it, but because God of His own mercy and grace imparted it.

There is a deep and true humility in the realization of that.

Contrast that with the necessary conclusion of your theology. If you chose Christ, it's because it's because you were good enough to, and better than the one who rejects Him.

There is no alternative.

So if the question were put to you, Why did you choose Arminianism? You would have to choose #2.

So, you pick #3, but with different wording so as to "soften" the blow, got it.

No, you don't "got it." You polluted #3 with an arbitrary stipulation. If anything was softened, it was your unjust indictment of the Gospel.

You cannot answer the "why" in every case in your own theology, so, even though we can answer "why" many more times than you can, it is only scoffing hypocrisy that requires one system be able to answer to one's satisfaction every trifling objection a carnal mind can raise.

But I did answer it. It is a lesson in humility for those of us who have knowledge, and ultimately for God's glory.

Nevertheless, the reason some believers don't accept your theology is because God didn't give the grace to impart that to us, for whatever reason.

So, you are left with the questions:

Actually, you are left with the questions, but I'll play along.

1. Why do you suppose God might not want some believers to believe Calvinistic soteriology? Why keep this truth from some of his elect children?

Why did God say, "The elder shall serve the younger?" God has his purposes, and they're His own.

But really here's what you're asking, Why are there some men of better understanding than others? Your theology allows for that disparity. It has to. But you make the answer man, and we make the answer God.

In yours, man can lift himself, in ours only God can lift a man. It's interesting that you attempt to deflect the scathing indictment of your theology onto Calvinists.

2. And why would you attempt to convert us to Calvinism when its up to him to impart that knowledge to us? When asked that question regarding evangelism Calvinists typically say, "Because God say so," but no where in scripture does it tell you to convert people to your soteriological views.

Look at what you said. You basically said that we're not commanded to preach the Gospel.

Why not spend your time doing evangelism, which you are commanded to do, and less time trying to convert us?

This is evangelism. First, Calvinists love the Gospel. We love to talk of it and preach it. We love the God Who gave it, and we love to do the work He gave us.

It's like the first commandment ever given, "Be fruitful and multiply." Now what newlywed doesn't love to at least go through the motions on that one?

For the life of me, I can't understand where an Arminian gets his motivation to do anything. He has no faith in prayer, since God will not overrule the free will of man, and the Arminian obviously has no love for his gospel, because he can see no purpose in preaching it if he doesn't have the power to persuade men of their own free will. It's like why stay married if one is unable to bare children? (as if children were the primary reason for marriage)

And there's the main difference, for the Calivinist preaching the Gospel is all about God, and for the Arminian, it's all about man.

But I'm not trying to convert you. You say some really stupid things. The questions that you think are probing are actually the trifling kicks of a carnal mind. And just like a man is sometimes compelled to respond when his bride is insulted, Calvinists have to respond to your cavils.:type: (There, the smiley means this wasn't said uncivilly.)

 

[quantumfaith]

No, you don't "got it." You polluted #3 with an arbitrary stipulation. If anything was softened, it was your unjust indictment of the Gospel.

You cannot answer the "why" in every case in your own theology, so, even though we can answer "why" many more times than you can, it is only scoffing hypocrisy that requires one system be able to answer to one's satisfaction every trifling objection a carnal mind can raise.

But I did answer it. It is a lesson in humility for those of us who have knowledge, and ultimately for God's glory.

Actually, you are left with the questions, but I'll play along.
Why did God say, "The elder shall serve the younger?" God has his purposes, and they're His own.

But really here's what you're asking, Why are there some men of better understanding than others? Your theology allows for that disparity. It has to. But you make the answer man, and we make the answer God.

In yours, man can lift himself, in ours only God can lift a man. It's interesting that you attempt to deflect the scathing indictment of your theology onto Calvinists.

Look at what you said. You basically said that we're not commanded to preach the Gospel.

This is evangelism. First, Calvinists love the Gospel. We love to talk of it and preach it. We love the God Who gave it, and we love to do the work He gave us.

It's like the first commandment ever given, "Be fruitful and multiply." Now what newlywed doesn't love to at least go through the motions on that one?

For the life of me, I can't understand where an Arminian gets his motivation to do anything. He has no faith in prayer, since God will not overrule the free will of man, and the Arminian obviously has no love for his gospel, because he can see no purpose in preaching it if he doesn't have the power to persuade men of their own free will. It's like why stay married if one is unable to bare children? (as if children were the primary reason for marriage)

And there's the main difference, for the Calivinist preaching the Gospel is all about God, and for the Arminian, it's all about man.

But I'm not trying to convert you. You say some really stupid things. The questions that you think are probing are actually the trifling kicks of a carnal mind. And just like a man is sometimes compelled to respond when his bride is insulted, Calvinists have to respond to your cavils.:type: (There, the smiley means this wasn't said uncivilly.)

1. Oh brother, I certainly hope I am misinterpreting your meaning here.
2. I find it so interesting that I see the same "issues" brought up by ardent reformers, in much the same way that "yall" indict we "non-reformers" and say we do not "understand" your system. To my knowledge no one on this board claims "man can lift himself". Totally a straw man thingy.
3. Another straw man thingy "all about man". I think you are intelligent enough to know otherwise.
4. So refreshing and encouraging to witness your "civility" directed toward other believers in Christ. (Sarcasm, just in case you did not catch it.)

 

[MB]

No, you don't "got it." You polluted #3 with an arbitrary stipulation. If anything was softened, it was your unjust indictment of the Gospel.

You cannot answer the "why" in every case in your own theology, so, even though we can answer "why" many more times than you can, it is only scoffing hypocrisy that requires one system be able to answer to one's satisfaction every trifling objection a carnal mind can raise.

But I did answer it. It is a lesson in humility for those of us who have knowledge, and ultimately for God's glory.

Actually, you are left with the questions, but I'll play along.
Why did God say, "The elder shall serve the younger?" God has his purposes, and they're His own.

But really here's what you're asking, Why are there some men of better understanding than others? Your theology allows for that disparity. It has to. But you make the answer man, and we make the answer God.

In yours, man can lift himself, in ours only God can lift a man. It's interesting that you attempt to deflect the scathing indictment of your theology onto Calvinists.

Look at what you said. You basically said that we're not commanded to preach the Gospel.

This is evangelism. First, Calvinists love the Gospel. We love to talk of it and preach it. We love the God Who gave it, and we love to do the work He gave us.

It's like the first commandment ever given, "Be fruitful and multiply." Now what newlywed doesn't love to at least go through the motions on that one?

For the life of me, I can't understand where an Arminian gets his motivation to do anything. He has no faith in prayer, since God will not overrule the free will of man, and the Arminian obviously has no love for his gospel, because he can see no purpose in preaching it if he doesn't have the power to persuade men of their own free will. It's like why stay married if one is unable to bare children? (as if children were the primary reason for marriage)

And there's the main difference, for the Calivinist preaching the Gospel is all about God, and for the Arminian, it's all about man.

But I'm not trying to convert you. You say some really stupid things. The questions that you think are probing are actually the trifling kicks of a carnal mind. And just like a man is sometimes compelled to respond when his bride is insulted, Calvinists have to respond to your cavils.:type: (There, the smiley means this wasn't said uncivilly.)

Sorry I didn't see one civil thing in it. All I could see here is your obvious dislike for skandelon. What happen to love your neighbor as your self?
MB

 

[Skandelon]

In summary:

I have "carnal mind."

I'm a scoffing hypocrite.

You wrongly accused me of claiming Calvinism teaches believers not commanded to preach the gospel, when the opposite point was being made.

We (arminians) shouldn't have any motivation to do anything.

We (arminians) have no faith in prayer.

We (arminians) have no love for his gospel or can see no purpose in preaching it...and when we do its all about man.

I say really stupid things

My questions are trifling kicks.

I guess that about sums it up.

I'll let people judge for themselves from the fruits of those posting here who might be a more likely representative of our Lord's teachings. I'd rather not engage with those who focus more on personal attacks than on the subject matter at hand. With regard to the subject, ad mist the barrage of attacks you affirmed #3 (God granted you something he chose not to grant non-Calvinistic believers) as your answer, so I thank you for that contribution at least. Have a great day and God bless.

 

[Aaron]

In summary:

I have "carnal mind."

Your objections to Calvinism are trifling. That's not a spiritual trait.

I'm a scoffing hypocrite.

Only if you require an opposing system to answer questions your system leaves unanswered.

You wrongly accused me of claiming Calvinism teaches believers not commanded to preach the gospel, when the opposite point was being made.

Soteriology and the preaching of the Gospel are one and the same. You can't separate them. So when you say, stop trying to convince others of your soteriology, you're telling people to stop preaching the Gospel, and preach your gospel.

We (arminians) shouldn't have any motivation to do anything.

We (arminians) have no faith in prayer.

We (arminians) have no love for his gospel or can see no purpose in preaching it...and when we do its all about man.

This is exactly what you say about Calvinists.

I say really stupid things

Well, let's see, you hurl accusations against Calvinists, and when the same judgments are made of your theology you think them unfair?

My questions are trifling kicks.

Yes. Calvinists are concerned less with "why" than "what." The Calvinist doesn't ask, Why has God made me thus? The Calvinist asks, What is God's will?

 

[kyredneck]

....Yes. Calvinists are concerned less with "why" than "what." The Calvinist doesn't ask, Why has God made me thus? The Calvinist asks, What is God's will?

AMEN! :thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

Soteriology and the preaching of the Gospel are one and the same. You can't separate them. So when you say, stop trying to convince others of your soteriology, you're telling people to stop preaching the Gospel, and preach your gospel.

I think you know as well as I do that many come to faith in Christ without having a clue about the claims of the Calvinistic dogma as it relates to the points of TULIP.

This is exactly what you say about Calvinists.

Prove it.

Well, let's see, you hurl accusations against Calvinists, and when the same judgments are made of your theology you think them unfair

I've never treated you or any Calvinist on this board with this type of disrespect. And I don't believe I've ever intentionally misrepresented Calvinism. In fact, I typically ask questions and respond to their words, nothing more.

Yes. Calvinists are concerned less with "why" than "what." The Calvinist doesn't ask, Why has God made me thus? The Calvinist asks, What is God's will?

Do you know how many times I've been asked "why I believed while others don't?" by Calvinists? For me to ask why some are Calvinists while others aren't isn't an unreasonable question and one that has been debated by scholars in a civil and respectful manner for years. Your approach in responding to this question reveals more about WHAT you are than it does about WHY you believe what you do.

 

[saturneptune]

[/I][/B]

1. Oh brother, I certainly hope I am misinterpreting your meaning here.
2. I find it so interesting that I see the same "issues" brought up by ardent reformers, in much the same way that "yall" indict we "non-reformers" and say we do not "understand" your system. To my knowledge no one on this board claims "man can lift himself". Totally a straw man thingy.
3. Another straw man thingy "all about man". I think you are intelligent enough to know otherwise.
4. So refreshing and encouraging to witness your "civility" directed toward other believers in Christ. (Sarcasm, just in case you did not catch it.)

Neither side in this thread has a lock on humility. I cannot imagine what the Lord thinks looking down on this watching these two going at each other explaining how the Lord set all this up. I am surprised they were not there in eternity past giving lessons to the Lord about election and the free will of man.

 

[saturneptune]

Your objections to Calvinism are trifling. That's not a spiritual trait.

Say Aaron, is that avatar your actual picture? If so, you are looking kind of pale. Maybe a tanning booth would help?

 

[Aaron]

I think you know as well as I do that many come to faith in Christ without having a clue about the claims of the Calvinistic dogma as it relates to the points of TULIP.

TULIP wouldn't exist if not for the preaching of the Arminians.

Prove it.

It's the basic premise of your questions: Why preach if God has chosen? Why pray if God has chosen? Why talk to non-Calvinists if God has chosen? etc.

They're the same kind of questions, but our answer is God. Yours is man.

I've never treated you or any Calvinist on this board with this type of disrespect. And I don't believe I've ever intentionally misrepresented Calvinism. In fact, I typically ask questions and respond to their words, nothing more.

The subtext of contempt in your posts is obvious to the most casual observer.

Do you know how many times I've been asked "why I believed while others don't?" by Calvinists? For me to ask why some are Calvinists while others aren't isn't an unreasonable question . . .

You say you argued these things as a former professed Calvinist yourself. You know what the answer is going to be, you just don't accept it, and claim the defacto position of being in the right if the trifling questions posed by the answer aren't themselves answered to your satisfaction.

. . . and one that has been debated by scholars in a civil and respectful manner for years. Your approach in responding to this question reveals more about WHAT you are than it does about WHY you believe what you do.

It isn't out of respect for Calvinist that you engage us. It's from an attitude of contempt. You employ the tactics of scoffers and sceptics who believe they've found the truth by denying Christianity. Your questions are trifling. God doesn't give gifts to His children equally, yet you arbitrarily presume that all men must be treated equally, that if God will save one, then He must save another. And if He doesn't, then it must be because the one He doesn't save has sinned worse than the one He has.

It's still up to the man in your theology.

You're left with no alternative.

 

[Aaron]

Say Aaron, is that avatar your actual picture? If so, you are looking kind of pale. Maybe a tanning booth would help?

And a razor! :tongue3:

 

[Skandelon]

TULIP wouldn't exist if not for the preaching of the Arminians.

I'm talking about the dogma they represent. Many come to faith in Jesus without ever understanding those five points of doctrine, and you know it.

It's the basic premise of your questions: Why preach if God has chosen?

Show me once where I ever asked that question. I know that the primary reason Calvinists evangelize is because they are told to by God. That was my point earlier.

Why pray if God has chosen?

Never asked that either.

Why talk to non-Calvinists if God has chosen? etc.

I asked this one to see if you answer it the same as you do the first one..."God told us to." Apparently, since you equate the five points of your dogma to the gospel itself you do.

They're the same kind of questions, but our answer is God. Yours is man.

Wrong again.

You say you argued these things as a former professed Calvinist yourse

As is the testimony of most Calvinists here who also claim to be former Arminians... so what?

You know what the answer is going to be, you just don't accept it, and claim the defacto position of being in the right if the trifling questions posed by the answer aren't themselves answered to your satisfaction.

Unlike you and other Calvinists who are always satisfied with the answers provided by non-Calvinists to your points, right? Sure.

It isn't out of respect for Calvinist that you engage us. It's from an attitude of contempt. You employ the tactics of scoffers and sceptics who believe they've found the truth by denying Christianity.

While you on the other hand are so sweet in your interactions with those you disagree. We could all learn so much from you Aaron. I wish God would grant me with as much grace as he has clearly given you.

Thanks for gracing us with your presence on a daily basis...no, no, thank God He has decreed you to grace us with your presence on a daily basis. Praise the Lord for Aaron. Love you bro! :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I'm talking about the dogma they represent. Many come to faith in Jesus without ever understanding those five points of doctrine, and you know it.

Show me once where I ever asked that question. I know that the primary reason Calvinists evangelize is because they are told to by God. That was my point earlier.

Never asked that either.

I asked this one to see if you answer it the same as you do the first one..."God told us to." Apparently, since you equate the five points of your dogma to the gospel itself you do.

Wrong again.

As is the testimony of most Calvinists here who also claim to be former Arminians... so what?


Unlike you and other Calvinists who are always satisfied with the answers provided by non-Calvinists to your points, right? Sure.

While you on the other hand are so sweet in your interactions with those you disagree. We could all learn so much from you Aaron. I wish God would grant me with as much grace as he has clearly given you.

Thanks for gracing us with your presence on a daily basis...no, no, thank God He has decreed you to grace us with your presence on a daily basis. Praise the Lord for Aaron. Love you bro! :smilewinkgrin:

Refreshing to see a guy like Arron who is so confident in his theology to tell you straight away his exact thought & feelings.:thumbs:

Next time Aaron my brother, dont candy coat it.....tell him what you really think. :laugh: gotta love him.:love2:

 

[quantumfaith]

Refreshing to see a guy like Arron who is so confident in his theology to tell you straight away his exact thought & feelings.:thumbs:

Next time Aaron my brother, dont candy coat it.....tell him what you really think. :laugh: gotta love him.:love2:

Alright EWF, FRIEND>>>> dont make me go Ninjee on you now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j1-xQA_ufE

 

[Aaron]

I'm talking about the dogma they represent. Many come to faith in Jesus without ever understanding those five points of doctrine, and you know it.

Many come to faith not understanding Christ's deity or the Trinity or many other facets of religion, but it's all part of the Gospel.

Show me once where I ever asked that question. I know that the primary reason Calvinists evangelize is because they are told to by God. That was my point earlier.

Never asked that either.

I asked this one to see if you answer it the same as you do the first one..."God told us to." Apparently, since you equate the five points of your dogma to the gospel itself you do.

I said these are the PREMISES of your questions.

Unlike you and other Calvinists who are always satisfied with the answers provided by non-Calvinists to your points, right? Sure.

If you look at the exchanges between Calvinists and Noncalvinists you will find that the Calvinist tends to appeal to the Scriptures, while the Noncalvinist tends to pose questions and appeal to some carnal sense of love and fairness.

It's as I said before, the Calvinist seldom asks "why," because he is more concerned about the "what."

Your questions are trifling, or they've been answered time and again. Like your question in the other thread about Frank and Fred. Do you know what the difference between them is? Ask a Calvinist and he will tell you God's grace is the difference. You already know that, but you keep asking the question, hoping that we would judge God for being unjust in His choices.

While you on the other hand are so sweet in your interactions with those you disagree. We could all learn so much from you Aaron. I wish God would grant me with as much grace as he has clearly given you.

Thanks for gracing us with your presence on a daily basis...no, no, thank God He has decreed you to grace us with your presence on a daily basis. Praise the Lord for Aaron. Love you bro! :smilewinkgrin:

You know, Luke tried to upbraid me one time for my straightforward approach, and tried sweetness with you. His sweetness was trampled and he got his hand bitten.

 

[Aaron]

Refreshing to see a guy like Arron who is so confident in his theology to tell you straight away his exact thought & feelings.:thumbs:

Much preferable to the artificial sweetness that sends a stinking odor into the air the moment it hits the burner, wouldn't you say?

Next time Aaron my brother, dont candy coat it.....tell him what you really think. :laugh: gotta love him.:love2:

I would just tell him God's judgment of his position. It's another gospel, and it carries a curse.

 

[Skandelon]

Much preferable to the artificial sweetness that sends a stinking odor into the air the moment it hits the burner, wouldn't you say?

You seem to presume that any "sweetness" that comes from someone who happens to see some points of doctrine differently from you as being artificial so as to justify your downright crudeness and un-Christlike demeanor.

I would just tell him God's judgment of his position. It's another gospel, and it carries a curse.

As if I can help it. God has obviously not decree me to be a Calvinist...well he did for about one decade then He decided that was long enough I guess...so what the heck. Bring on the judgement for the position that God decreed I should have. The cry "Here I stand, I can do no other," takes on a whole new meaning.

 

[Skandelon]

Many come to faith not understanding Christ's deity or the Trinity or many other facets of religion, but it's all part of the Gospel.

And many have died never understanding all these facets of the faith and certainly they are still saved by grace... which still would prove my point.

I said these are the PREMISES of your questions.

My only premise to that particular question was the Calvinistic answer to the question regarding "why evangelize," which we all know is: "Because God says so," which is an accurate premise. So what's your beef?

If you look at the exchanges between Calvinists and Noncalvinists you will find that the Calvinist tends to appeal to the Scriptures, while the Noncalvinist tends to pose questions and appeal to some carnal sense of love and fairness.

Beauty [and apparently Biblical objectivity] is in the eye of the beholder.

Your questions are trifling, or they've been answered time and again. Like your question in the other thread about Frank and Fred. Do you know what the difference between them is? Ask a Calvinist and he will tell you God's grace is the difference. You already know that, but you keep asking the question, hoping that we would judge God for being unjust in His choices.

Actually, neither one of them is saved, or even presumed to be "elect" so that actually is not an applicable reply to the given scenario; which just goes to show that you really don't know what questions have or haven't been asked or answered, because you don't even understand the questions.

The question is to help those reading these threads and maybe even Calvinists (as I used to be one and know what helped me see the error of my ways) to understand the difference between the sin nature of man from birth and the nature of a man who has grown calloused over time. That is my unapologetic intent.

Yes, I'm here because I want to help save you from your errors Aaron. Aren't you glad God decreed me to be here? HE DID, you can't deny it, so maybe you should ask yourself WHY? Why did God decree this scoffing trifler to post here and engage me in a discussion? Surely God has a purpose for all things, doesn't He? Or do you only believe that in theory? Maybe I've been sent to be a thorn in your side or perhaps the light that leads you from the darkness of your addictions...you know the ones I mean. Come with me Aaron come to the light. Let go of your anger and hostility and be free....
:love2:

 

[Aaron]

Why don't you just pray for me? Oh wait. That doesn't work because God won't go against my will. *rolls eyes*

 

[quantumfaith]

Why don't you just pray for me? Oh wait. That doesn't work because God won't go against my will. *rolls eyes*

You are making progress Aaron.