An anti-Calvinist conundrum

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Whatever;

Yet the non-Calvinists on here simply won't use the same language that the Bible uses.

Actually Calvinist rip scripture apart trying to prove there heresy. If they find a word they don't like they just change it to say what they want.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us all;
Mike

 

[bjonson]

ILUVLIGHT,

Your statement might carry some weight if you could only answer the scriptural questions that the Calvinists have provided to you.

 

[rc]

ILL... you used the word heresy.... YOU still haven't answered my question on WHICH council condemned it as such?

We (Calvinist) can freely without guilt of lying to ourselves can say Arminianism is heresy because we have church councils that state such.

You don't.....

 

[whetstone]

Originally posted by ILUVLIGHT:
Hi Whatever;
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Yet the non-Calvinists on here simply won't use the same language that the Bible uses.

Actually Calvinist rip scripture apart trying to prove there heresy. If they find a word they don't like they just change it to say what they want.</font>[/QUOTE]Mike you're very good at producing empty accusations. why not back up your words with facts or don't say anything at all?

 

[dianetavegia]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
But I'll go so far as to say a 5 point Calvinist can be a Christian. Will you say the same thing about a non-Calvinist?

Still haven't gotten an answer on this. I'd really like to know if Calvinists believe those of us who do not agree with Calvin's teachings are saved?

 

[whetstone]

yes they can be saved so long as their faith is in Christ rather than in their faith. I think most people who come to Christ haven't made up their mind one way or the other, but Arminians who are entrenched in what they believe tend to put more faith into their faith rather then in Christ's blood. This doesn't invalidate their salvation, but it sure makes things confusing when they try to witness to unbelievers. This is why we have so many washups and 'deconversions.' Tell a man his salvation is his doing, and he will 'unsave' himself many times.

 

[dianetavegia]

Calvinists can be saved so long as their faith is in Christ rather than in John Calvin. I think most people who come to Christ haven't made up their mind one way or the other, but those who are entrenched in what they believe tend to put more faith into what John Calvin believed rather than in Christ's blood.

Just turning it around for you to see how it sounds THIS way.

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Still haven't gotten an answer on this. I'd really like to know if Calvinists believe those of us who do not agree with Calvin's teachings are saved?

Diane, in all honestly, can you produce any statement from any Calvinist on this forum who has accused you, or any Arminian, of being lost because you disagree with Calvinism?

On the other hand I can show you from this forum Arminians claiming that Calvinists are not elect because they disagree with Arminianism.

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Calvinists can be saved so long as their faith is in Christ rather than in John Calvin. I think most people who come to Christ haven't made up their mind one way or the other, but those who are entrenched in what they believe tend to put more faith into what John Calvin believed rather than in Christ's blood.

Just turning it around for you to see how it sounds THIS way.

But you didn't turn it around. You twisted it. He never said anything about their faith being in James Arminius, but you twisted his statement regarding their faith being in their faith to Calvinist's faith being in a man.

That type of conduct is beneath you, or, at least it ought to be.

 

[rc]

Diane,

Keep on believing in heresy. The church councils came up with TULIP, NOT Calvin. And they made it as a result of the condemned heresy of Arminiansim...

I believe in the Bible. I can agree with Paul, Pre Nicene fathers, Augustine but only because we are in AGREEMENT. I don't rely on great teachers, I just agree with them. You should agree with the great teachers God gave the church also... Unless you think you know more than they? ...

 

[whetstone]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Calvinists can be saved so long as their faith is in Christ rather than in John Calvin.

I don't recall a single Calvinist I've ever met putting their faith in John Calvin. I don't get how people can repeatedly tell you what Calvinism is about and you still refuse to represent it correctly. Would it be a good thing for me to go to a Catholic board and tell Catholics 'this is what you believe' and ALL of them say 'no.'?? Why force something on us that we don't believe? Why accuse us of a heresy we aren't guilty of? Are you playing dumb or do you have an agenda? Can you please clear this up for everyone?

 

[dianetavegia]

Sure. First of all, Calvinism makes no sense to me scripturally and secondly, the Calvinisitic answers keep changing!

You'd all like to tell us non Calvinists what WE believe but cannot tolerate it when your beliefs are questioned.

My objection to John Calvin's beliefs (and that's what they are!) is with predestination/ preselection. I do NOT, however, think it will affect your salvation.

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Sure. First of all, Calvinism makes no sense to me scripturally and secondly, the Calvinisitic answers keep changing!

You'd all like to tell us non Calvinists what WE believe but cannot tolerate it when your beliefs are questioned.

My objection to John Calvin's beliefs (and that's what they are!) is with predestination/ preselection. I do NOT, however, think it will affect your salvation.

I don't know what all you believe, and I'd be foolish to tell you that you believe X after you have asserted to believe not X. All I ask is 1) that you believe me when I tell you what I believe, even if you disagree with me, and 2) that you be civil. So far I think you have done both, and I hope I have. Some others (on both sides) have not and I think that's a shame.

What do you believe about predestination? How would you explain Eph 1:4, for example?

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
First of all, Calvinism makes no sense to me scripturally and secondly, the Calvinisitic answers keep changing!

Two points. Does the Trinity make sense to you or do you deny that too? And second, Calvinist's answers don't change simply because the bible doesn't change. It is not the Calvinist's beliefs that keep changing, it is the false accusations that they believe what we all know they don't that keeps changing.

You'd all like to tell us non Calvinists what WE believe but cannot tolerate it when your beliefs are questioned.

Completely untrue. Nobody who is honest minds having his beliefs questioned, and most love to have the opportunity to tell others about those beliefs. What the Calvinists object to is that so many of the anti-calvinist posters misrepresent what Calvinists believe and when they are corrected they keep doing it anyway.

My objection to John Calvin's beliefs (and that's what they are!) is with predestination/ preselection. I do NOT, however, think it will affect your salvation.

And the Calvinsts on the forum have said over and over again they don't care what Calvin believed, they get their system of faith from the bible, but, once again, you misstate what they believe, or in this case, why they believe it, instead of allowing them to speak for themselves.

And, of course, if you have a problem with predestination, it is not Calvinists you have a problem with, but the bible!

Romans 8:29-30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Ephesians 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

 

[Wes Outwest]

Cassidy, it is easy to establish 5-POINT of ANYTHING by using selected bible verses taken OUT OF CONTEXT.

That is what Calvinism does that non calvinists object to!

Romans 8:29,30 Romans is a directed correspondence to a specific geographically situated people. So then, who was Paul saying was selected ahead of time to be molded into the pattern of His son? There's 11 of the them and what did the Son say to and of them? They are his brothers.

It is through the teachings of the 11 that we receive our education in being "moulded into the image of the Christ". But Paul is telling the Romans that the Apostles were "the elect" for that purpose.

Ephesians 1:5 Paul is telling the Ephesians in a directed correspondence, that the Apostles were preselected to their purpose and glory.

Ephesians 1:11 Paul reiterates that the apostles have "received their heritage" that is being inducted into God's hall of fame, as "family members"

In Ephesians 1:13, Paul shifts gears and NOW introduces the Ephesians by telling them that they too, having heard the word, have put their trust in it and are thereby sealed with the spirit!

Please stop misusing Romans and Ephesians 1:1-12 to support "general election". IT DOES NOT DO SO!

 

[El_Guero]

Hello Whet

Hello El,

It would probably [*] help if you would go back to the first page and read my original post. That way you would know what I was trying to argue for.

Wellllll ... I re-read your posts two more times (4 or 5 times total)

... Could you try staying closer to your topic [while your premise is part of a logical falacy**, it is still YOUR premise]?

First, I said, I do not understand what you are trying to argue for, but your argumentation will not change the fact that God's Word IS God's (God's Word belongs to God).

[*] What probably would help is a clear discussion. While clarity will not win nor loose your side of the argument [nor my side either] - I could actually understand what you are trying to state.

[**] Defining God in your premise for the sake of your argument is "begging the conclusion" fallacy web page .

 

[El_Guero]

Whetstone

Re-wording your premise might help ...

IF GOD IS GOD, then can He make a rock so big that He cannot move it ...

or,

If God is God, then can He force someone to do something of their free will


Logically these are examples of paradoxical argumentation ... in more common parlance, this is a fallacy.

 

[whetstone]

el...why are we talking about a post i made a long time ago that was merely an example- and had no bearing on the actual argument? i'm baffled by your posts.

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by El_Guero:
Hello Whet

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Hello El,

It would probably [*] help if you would go back to the first page and read my original post. That way you would know what I was trying to argue for.

Wellllll ... I re-read your posts two more times (4 or 5 times total)

... Could you try staying closer to your topic [while your premise is part of a logical falacy**, it is still YOUR premise]?

First, I said, I do not understand what you are trying to argue for, but your argumentation will not change the fact that God's Word IS God's (God's Word belongs to God).

[*] What probably would help is a clear discussion. While clarity will not win nor loose your side of the argument [nor my side either] - I could actually understand what you are trying to state.

[**] Defining God in your premise for the sake of your argument is "begging the conclusion" fallacy web page . </font>[/QUOTE]El - that was me, not Whetstone; and my post to which you said "I really don't know what you were trying to argue for" was on page 3, not page 1 (sorry); and you still haven't provided any interaction with Gen. 50:20 or Job 1 and 2 or Acts 2:23.

 

[El_Guero]

... Thank you for the opportunity to re-examine a classic conondrum ...