Are You a Calvinist or a Non-Cal?

[jbh28]

You've got a big problem, we know for a FACT that Cornelius and the Philipian jailer were saved.

They both desired to be saved, and they both desired to be saved God's way.

Your view is easily refuted, but you will not admit it ever.

How do you know that they desired to be saved God's way? Because they got saved God's way? Well, that poses no problem to my view.

My view is not refuted. I've got many passages to backup all my views. Everyone is bibically based. Yes they were saved and my view has no issues with how they got saved. But as usual, you probably don't have my view correct anyway.

No man is saved outside the working of the Holy Spirit in his heart.

 

[Winman]

Ok, I'll do that same. God does not keep man from coming to him.

"without hope or opportunity to willingly accept God's appeal for reconciliation."

all men have the opportunity to willingly accept God's appeal for reconciliation. The issue is that man doesn't want to accept. That's what the Bible teaches.

Now, I'm not going to keep playing your little word games. It gets tiring to try to argue with someone what I really believes. Like they are some expirt on my bliefs. It's strange that non Calvinist believe they know what Calvinists believe better than Calvinist. Your statement "without hope or opportunity to willingly accept" if not true. Jesus Christ paid a sufficient payment on the cross that "is abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world."

It is you that plays games with words JBH. Doesn't matter, the scriptures prove your view wrong. Men are able to be willing to be saved God's way, both the Philipian jailer and Cornelius (and his household) prove that.

You need to invent some new word games to wiggle around the Philipian jailer and Cornelius.

 

[jbh28]

It is you that plays games with words JBH. Doesn't matter, the scriptures prove your view wrong. Men are able to be willing to be saved God's way, both the Philipian jailer and Cornelius (and his household) prove that.

You need to invent some new word games to wiggle around the Philipian jailer and Cornelius.

Of course they were willing to be saved God's way. As you said, they got saved correct. But this was not outside of the working of the Holy Spirit. This was not just man converting himself.

I don't play word game. Never had. Not really clever enough to do that. I don't say things that you believe and word them in such a way as to imply something totally different.

 

[Winman]

Of course they were willing to be saved God's way. As you said, they got saved correct. But this was not outside of the working of the Holy Spirit. This was not just man converting himself.

I don't play word game. Never had. Not really clever enough to do that. I don't say things that you believe and word them in such a way as to imply something totally different.

You contradict yourself. In the past you have correctly said that regeneration and belief happen at the same moment. I agree with this, although I believe scripture shows faith as the cause, and life or rengeneration as the effect.

But now you are saying a person has the new heart that can be willing to believe before faith. The Philipian jailer was willing and desiring to be saved before he believed. He didn't even know what he had to do to be saved, Paul had to tell him he needed to believe to be saved, and then Paul had to preach the gospel so that he might believe on Christ.

So, here is a man who was willing and had desire to be saved before faith, and therefore before regeneration as you have agreed in the past.

Scriptures agree with the non-Cal/Arm view that the word of God, and the influence of the Spirit can convict and convince a man, bringing him to repentance and faith. It is true that the Philipian jailer was influenced by the Spirit, he saw and felt the great earthquake that opened all the cells to the prison. It is not unlikely that he also knew some details about Paul and Silas and why they had been jailed. He undoubtably knew they were preachers and taught about God. The earthquake no doubt convinced him these were men of God.

Nevertheless, if regeneration and belief occur at the same time (and they do), then the Philipian jailer was willing and desiring to be saved before he both believed and was regenerated.

You cannot explain yourself out of this one.

 

[Yeshua1]

You contradict yourself. In the past you have correctly said that regeneration and belief happen at the same moment. I agree with this, although I believe scripture shows faith as the cause, and life or rengeneration as the effect.

But now you are saying a person has the new heart that can be willing to believe before faith. The Philipian jailer was willing and desiring to be saved before he believed. He didn't even know what he had to do to be saved, Paul had to tell him he needed to believe to be saved, and then Paul had to preach the gospel so that he might believe on Christ.

So, here is a man who was willing and had desire to be saved before faith, and therefore before regeneration as you have agreed in the past.

Scriptures agree with the non-Cal/Arm view that the word of God, and the influence of the Spirit can convict and convince a man, bringing him to repentance and faith. It is true that the Philipian jailer was influenced by the Spirit, he saw and felt the great earthquake that opened all the cells to the prison. It is not unlikely that he also knew some details about Paul and Silas and why they had been jailed. He undoubtably knew they were preachers and taught about God. The earthquake no doubt convinced him these were men of God.

Nevertheless, if regeneration and belief occur at the same time (and they do), then the Philipian jailer was willing and desiring to be saved before he both believed and was regenerated.

You cannot explain yourself out of this one.

the Gospel does its work to save tjhe Eklect of God, as they will hear and receive the Lord jesus, by the work of the Holy spirit to take the words of the Bible and allow the sinner to be able to process them and "make sense' of them...

remember that jesus said many times that His words were to them who had 'ears to hear", while rest stayed tone deaf to his message!

 

[Skandelon]

Ok, I'll do that same. God does not keep man from coming to him.

The difference is my answer actually addressed the question, your answer does not. If God is not the one who punished all of mankind with a nature unable to respond to His appeal, then who did? Was that an accident that took God by surprise? Is that the one thing God isn't sovereign over in your system?

all men have the opportunity to willingly accept God's appeal for reconciliation. The issue is that man doesn't want to accept.

You do know the word 'willing' and 'want' are synonymous, right? So, you just said, "all men have the opportunity to want to accept God...the issue is that man doesn't want to accept." In fact, the CAN'T want to according to your system and you know it. And my question is WHY? Why don't they want to? The obvious answer is because of their innate depraved sin nature, which they were born with because...

You tell me?

 

[Winman]

the Gospel does its work to save tjhe Eklect of God, as they will hear and receive the Lord jesus, by the work of the Holy spirit to take the words of the Bible and allow the sinner to be able to process them and "make sense' of them...

remember that jesus said many times that His words were to them who had 'ears to hear", while rest stayed tone deaf to his message!

What I remember is that you have already been banned twice.

I am sure you will be banned again JesusFan/DaChaser1.

 

[cyberjosh]

All I can say is that I am not a 5-point Calvinist. I just posted a thread to try to better help me place my particular strand of belief among historical creeds/within a particular doctrinal milieu. I, along with others I know, have taken to calling myself a 'Calminian' for years. I don't think Dwight Moody was a Calvinist either, although Charles Spurgeon (a 5-point Calvinist) seemed to be fond of him nonetheless because of his obvious heart for the Gospel.

 

[jbh28]

The difference is my answer actually addressed the question, your answer does not.

My answer answers the question. What it doesn't do it go with your scheme of your disingenuous word games. You know exactly what you are doing. I'm not fooled by it in the least. You continue to word your opponents view in such a way as to make it appear like something other than what is really believed. I attempted to correct you. Instead of apologizing, you just continue to do it. Unless you want to actually deal with a biblical subject, I'm not going to waste my time with your word games. There are plenty of people on here that can discuss the Bible.

 

[Skandelon]

jbh,

If anyone is 'playing word games' it is you. I'm simply asking you WHY mankind can't want to come to Christ even when invited and you refuse to answer the question. You play word games by answering the question with other question and restating the same thing over and over.

You: Men don't want to come to Christ
Me: Why?
You: Because they don't want to.
Me: I understand that, but why don't they want to?
You: Because they are not willing.
Me: That is the same thing, I'm asking you why they are unwilling.
You: Because they don't want to.
Me: Yes, we have established that point, I'm asking you WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come.
You: Stop playing word games. They are sinners and don't want to come.
Me: I'm not playing word games, I just want you to tell me why you believe they don't want to come to Christ.
You: Because they have a totally depraved nature.
Me: Why?
You: Because Adam sinned.
Me: So, God punished mankind for Adam's sin by making them all totally depraved.
You: No, that is not what I said.
Me: So, what are you saying.
You: They wanted to.
Me: ARRRRRGGGGG!

 

[webdog]

jbh,

If anyone is 'playing word games' it is you. I'm simply asking you WHY mankind can't want to come to Christ even when invited and you refuse to answer the question. You play word games by answering the question with other question and restating the same thing over and over.

You: Men don't want to come to Christ
Me: Why?
You: Because they don't want to.
Me: I understand that, but why don't they want to?
You: Because they are not willing.
Me: That is the same thing, I'm asking you why they are unwilling.
You: Because they don't want to.
Me: Yes, we have established that point, I'm asking you WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come.
You: Stop playing word games. They are sinners and don't want to come.
Me: I'm not playing word games, I just want you to tell me why you believe they don't want to come to Christ.
You: Because they have a totally depraved nature.
Me: Why?
You: Because Adam sinned.
Me: So, God punished mankind for Adam's sin by making them all totally depraved.
You: No, that is not what I said.
Me: So, what are you saying.
You: They wanted to.
Me: ARRRRRGGGGG!

:thumbs: :laugh: That is what I have witnessed too...

 

[InTheLight]

Calvinist: Men don't want to come to Christ
Me: Why?
Calvinist: Because they don't want to.
Me: I understand that, but why don't they want to?
Calvinist: Because they are not willing.
Me: That is the same thing, I'm asking you why they are unwilling.
Calvinist: Because they don't want to.
Me: Yes, we have established that point, I'm asking you WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come.
Calvinist: Stop playing word games. They are sinners and don't want to come.
Calvinist: I'm not playing word games, I just want you to tell me why you believe they don't want to come to Christ.
Calvinist: Because they have a totally depraved nature.
Me: Why?
Calvinist: IT'S A MYSTERY, OK?

 

[jbh28]

You guys can mock all you want, but I'll stick with what the Bible teaches. The Bible clearly teaches that man is sinful and never seeks after God. If you want to know why God allowed man to be evil, you'll have to ask him. But none the less he did.

I guess you children could answer your own question. "WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come."

I'd be real interested to see you answer that.

 

[Skandelon]

The Bible clearly teaches that man is sinful and never seeks after God.

True, but how does that prove that men can't respond to a God actively seeking them?

Proof that someone can't make a phone call is not proof that one can't answer the phone if it rings.

If you want to know why God allowed man to be evil, you'll have to ask him. But none the less he did.

Oh, He already told us why he gave men the freedom to rebel.

"He has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." - Paul

I guess you children could answer your own question. "WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come."

Because that is their contra-causally free choice despite God's love and gracious provisions. In your system they CAN'T because the faith is not granted, the grace is not given, the choice is not made by God.

In our system they WON'T even though the faith has been granted, the grace has been given and the choice has been made. They freely (contra-causally) chose to trade the truth in for a lie and they could have done otherwise, they were free to willingly come when invited. They had everything they needed and stand 'without excuse.'

 

[Skandelon]

JBH, Look at this analogy:

A Lion, a rabbit and a woman stand before you. You place a steak and a salad in front of each one of them and say, "You are free to choose which one you want to eat."

We already know what the Lion and Rabbit will choose, because their instinctive nature dictates it. It is predetermined by their inborn nature. We don't know what the woman will choose, because her choice is truly free, because her nature is such that she could eat either one. It is contra-causally free. She is free to willingly choose the steak or the salad. Nothing in her nature or anything created by something outside herself is determining that choice. She determines that choice. She may desire to lose weight and choose the salad, or she may desire the taste of a steak. She might desire both and have to determine on which desire to act. The actor determines the act.

Your problem is that you seem to think that the Lion's and Rabbit's choices are equally free simply because they are 'choosing what they want.' You do so while IGNORING the question: Why do they want that? The obvious answer is because, "God made them that way." You refuse to admit that fact which is why we are going around and around...

 

[jbh28]

JBH, Look at this analogy:

No, give me the Bible....

Because that is their contra-causally free choice despite God's love and gracious provisions.

What do you mean by "contra-causually

In your system they CAN'T because the faith is not granted, the grace is not given, the choice is not made by God.

So people have faith and grace and are not saved?

They had everything they needed and stand 'without excuse.'

but they don't....why?

 

[webdog]

You guys can mock all you want, but I'll stick with what the Bible teaches. The Bible clearly teaches that man is sinful and never seeks after God. If you want to know why God allowed man to be evil, you'll have to ask him. But none the less he did.

I guess you children could answer your own question. "WHY they are unwilling and don't want to come."

I'd be real interested to see you answer that.

How can we answer for another? We do not have access to their mind, thought and reasoning patterns. Now if you ask one of them, I'm sure they will give you their individual reason why.

This is like asking you why your boss chose a red tie to wear today. Can you answer that?

 

[jbh28]

How can we answer for another? We do not have access to their mind, thought and reasoning patterns. Now if you ask one of them, I'm sure they will give you their individual reason why.

This is like asking you why your boss chose a red tie to wear today. Can you answer that?

Well, I've been asked this question and was mocked for not having an answer to why they didn't want to accept Christ.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I was predestined to believe in free-will.

 

[webdog]

Well, I've been asked this question and was mocked for not having an answer to why they didn't want to accept Christ.

I didn't see this question posed to you, but at any rate your side claims to know the "why" of another person when we can only speculate what someone knows. We do they loved the darkness more than the light which implies loving the light is a real possibility, something that contradicts compatibilism.