An "Ax to Grind!"

[atpollard]

When all of yall quit calling us arminians, semi-pelagiusts etc then we will worry about what you all want to be called. Oh by the way add "ignorant" to that list.

'Calvinist' has the common alternative 'Reformed', what is the preferred alternative to 'Arminian'?

(I have a hard time imagining John Wesley as 'ignorant' ... and if he is, we could use more such 'ignorant' men to spread the Gospel and inspire the people to take God seriously.)

 

[Reynolds]

Hmm, so what should we call the

Calvinism & Arminianism Debate forum?

Good question. The Calvinists do not want to be called Calvinists. Seems to pose a problem.

 

[Revmitchell]

Good question. The Calvinists do not want to be called Calvinists. Seems to pose a problem.

It hasn't always been that way on this board. I have been around here since 06 and the calvies have not always been so divisive. Of late, the temperament of the calvies coming on the board has been destroy all enemies at all costs. The enemies being all those with whom they disagree. It has grown this way of late even in the SBC. Just take a look at Patterson. Everything that gets said is put in the worst possible light. If you do not agree with them you are ignorant and not worthy to speak to. Its the height of arrogance. They are not looking for a conversation, they are looking to annihilate you.

 

[Revmitchell]

'Calvinist' has the common alternative 'Reformed', what is the preferred alternative to 'Arminian'?

(I have a hard time imagining John Wesley as 'ignorant' ... and if he is, we could use more such 'ignorant' men to spread the Gospel and inspire the people to take God seriously.)

If you are not an Arminian in any form there is no alternative.

 

[HankD]

If you are not an Arminian in any form there is no alternative.

yes there is. I am a proud Mugwump. Undecided.

 

[Rhetorician]

yes there is. I am a proud Mugwump. Undecided.

Bro. "HankD,"

It is not possible to be "undecided." The Bible speaks clearly of "predestination" and "election." You believe the Bible do you not? Like Paul once uttered in a now famous sermon, "I know you believer the Bible..." So it matters not on which side you stand: Either the Particular Redemption side or the General Atonement side, but you must decide and believe something. There is no middle ground. Then, when you decide you must educate yourself as to why you believe one way or the other. "Always be ready to give an account of the hope that lieth within you!"

If you think about it I am sure you did not mean what you have written?!

sdg!

rd

 

[Rippon]

(I have a hard time imagining John Wesley as 'ignorant' ... and if he is, we could use more such 'ignorant' men to spread the Gospel and inspire the people to take God seriously.)

John Wesley was not an admirable person. He was a liar, deceiver and blasphemer to say the least.

Do some research on how he treated Toplady and James Hervey.

 

[Rhetorician]

It hasn't always been that way on this board. I have been around here since 06 and the calvies have not always been so divisive. Of late, the temperament of the calvies coming on the board has been destroy all enemies at all costs. The enemies being all those with whom they disagree. It has grown this way of late even in the SBC. Just take a look at Patterson. Everything that gets said is put in the worst possible light. If you do not agree with them you are ignorant and not worthy to speak to. Its the height of arrogance. They are not looking for a conversation, they are looking to annihilate you.

My friend "Revmitchell,"

I declare my Christian love for you and an admiration for your stance. I would to God that Paige Patterson, Eric Hankins, you, and myself could love each other with the Master's love in unity. And strive for the truthfulness of the Gospel as all of us understand it to be. May your tribe and my tribe increase as unto the Lord. I bid you "God Speed" and "God's Blessings" on your household and ministry.

sdg!

rd

 

[TCassidy]

Isn't the difference between C and A contained in the question - who made the choice?

No. Everybody makes choices. Some good choices and some bad choices. The issue is, why would one person hear the Gospel and make a good choice, and the guy sitting next to him make a bad choice?

Or - what determines "election" ? God's foreknowledge or God's decree/declaration?

I think Paul made that abundantly clear.

Eph 1:7 In whom (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Eph 1:8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph 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:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

What do we say? "Praise me for exercising my "innate free will?" Or "Praise God who regenerated my sin sick soul while I was still His enemy?"

 

[agedman]

Isn't the difference between C and A contained in the question - who made the choice?

Or - what determines "election" ? God's foreknowledge or God's decree/declaration?

Or something else maybe?

IMO, The fruit of the Spirit ought to be the test of salvation in addition (or maybe exclusively) to doctrinal beliefs.
It's difficult to fake the fruit of the Spirit.

Certainly,

But in practice, during what is a typical American Baptist invitation following a time of preaching, such a question is merely in the heart of the staff and not ask openly. That is why, frankly, it is not uncommon to find the presentation of the gospel identical in the two camps. The appeal is made to all, the seed is sown indiscriminately, but not ground is properly prepared for the seed to mature to harvest.

Many are the redeemed who consider it was their idea and freedom of choice until they mature in the Scriptures and understanding of the work of God which opens the understanding that God placed that will and willingness in the heart by enabling the hearing of the Scriptures and preaching (explanation) of the Word. This is how Romans 10:8 presents the thinking. The Word is already in the heart and mouth and the results are confession (one version states "unto" salvation or, as the NLT states, "that you are saved."

Too many think the confession results in salvation. But that isn't what the original language can support. Rather it is that salvation has occurred, that as a baby's cry from the womb indicates life, so it is with the cry of the redeemed.

 

[HankD]

Bro. "HankD,"

It is not possible to be "undecided." The Bible speaks clearly of "predestination" and "election." You believe the Bible do you not? Like Paul once uttered in a now famous sermon, "I know you believer the Bible..." So it matters not on which side you stand: Either the Particular Redemption side or the General Atonement side, but you must decide and believe something. There is no middle ground. Then, when you decide you must educate yourself as to why you believe one way or the other. "Always be ready to give an account of the hope that lieth within you!"

If you think about it I am sure you did not mean what you have written?!

sdg!

rd

Well, prepare to be disappointed, rhet.

The LORD knows my heart and knows that I speak the truth - that I am undecided.

Also, just because you are unaware of possibilities other than "Particular" and "General" is no guarantee it/they do not exist.
After all, we don't know what we don't know.

 

[agedman]

Well, prepare to be disappointed, rhet.

The LORD knows my heart and knows that I speak the truth - that I am undecided.

Also, just because you are unaware of possibilities other than "Particular" and "General" is no guarantee it/they do not exist.
After all, we don't know what we don't know.

I have no peculiar notions about election and predestination. They are both taught in the Scriptures. Same with he millennial reign.

It has been and exercise to my spirit how some will pick and choose what they will not take as factual in the principles of Scriptures.

So, do not be dismayed. That you might not decide on these issues until crossing over from this life to the next will not prevent a single rabbit from having a hairlip.

 

[HankD]

Tom, my question is - what were the highlights of "The Counsel of his will?

in all probability at least these - our hopeless and helpless estate.

No. Everybody makes choices. Some good choices and some bad choices. The issue is, why would one person hear the Gospel and make a good choice, and the guy sitting next to him make a bad choice?

I was highlighting the difference between C and A. when I asked who made the choice - Did God make the choice or man?

Eph 1:7 In whom (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Eph 1:8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph 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:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

What do we say? "Praise me for exercising my "innate free will?" Or "Praise God who regenerated my sin sick soul while I was still His enemy?"

A's would say "Thank the lord for giving me the power to choose Him". Hmm - come to think of it both C's and A's would

In my warped way of thinking C versus A is similar to the blind men trying to describe an elephant.
(Not that you or any A brethren are spiritually blind).

'the counsel of his own will:' - What were the agenda points?

I find it easier to seek those manifesting the image of Christ and practicing the fruit of the Spirit than to depend on a doctrinal creed though though it has its necessity since I am truly undecided - a Mugwump.

 

[Revmitchell]

What do we say? "Praise me for exercising my "innate free will?" Or "Praise God who regenerated my sin sick soul while I was still His enemy?"

Nice false dichotomy

 

[Felipe Rios]

First, when debating a Calvinist, there is one important rule to remember:
Calvinist = superior intellect
Non-Calvinist = ignorant

Second, would all Calvinists shun the doctrines that you listed above?

Non-Calvinist= ignorant? Based on your opinion.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

John Wesley was not an admirable person. He was a liar, deceiver and blasphemer to say the least.

Do some research on how he treated Toplady and James Hervey.

Additionally, consider the character of Martin Luther as reveled in his treatise concerning Jews: "Of/On Jews and their lies."

 

[Wesley Briggman]

[2Ti 2:14-16 KJV] 14 Of these things put [them] in remembrance, charging [them] before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, [but] to the subverting of the hearers. 15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16 But shun profane [and] vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.


[1Co 14:38 KJV] 38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

 

[TCassidy]

in all probability at least these - our hopeless and helpless estate.

Exactly. We were helpless. We could not help ourselves. We could not believe. We could not repent. We could not obey. Then God regenerated our sin sick souls and gave us the ability to believe, repent, and obey.

What were the agenda points?

Just like it says in verse 11: #1. being predestinated. #2 according to His purpose #3 of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.

depend on a doctrinal creed

Who depends on a doctrinal creed? I certainly don't. I depend on my bible.

 

[Rippon]

Non-Calvinist= ignorant? Based on your opinion.

You are confused. Pastor Bob is not a Calvinist.

 

[Rippon]

Additionally, consider the character of Martin Luther as reveled in his treatise concerning Jews: "Of/On Jews and their lies."

Martin Luther deserves a lot of blame for that screed and additional stances.