Arminian vs. Calvinist handling of scripture

[romanbear]

Hi Npetreley;
Since my smiley face offends you, I won't use anything for you to determine my mood and to what intent I'm asking any questions.I'm not being deceiving as, maybe you suggest.
All Arminians believe in election just not unconditional election.For instance when I tell my brother about the Love of Christ and he visibility shows that he is drawn, but because of pride resist You say he isn't drawn because he isn't chosen, but nowhere does the Bible say we cannot resist.This is total conjecture on the Calvinist end
In your statement about Joshua 24:15 It may not say we have free will there but when we hear the Gospel we have to listen. God draws us then we have the opportunity to accept or deny the Calling of the Holy Spirit.
You want to claim that we have no choice then show where it says we have no Choice you haven't done that yet.
A quote from you;
--------------------------------------------------------------------
These "missing points" would not be as big a problem for free-will advocates if they would simply provide other scriptures to address them. But they do not. There are no scriptures that say that the mechanism by which we choose to serve the LORD is free will. So when pressed on this, they add these conclusions from logic, inference, or just-so stories about how we were created and what that means.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now look who's offering logic about Joshua 24:15 You say this verse doesn't say we have free will but then you accuse Arminians that they use logic. What are you doing? You haven't proven that your theory is truth, you are only assuming it has because as you say free will is not in this verse.This verse implies choice.You just can't see it because of your own logic...
Jn.5:21Actually it says that both offices of the God head quickenth who they will... They quickenth those who believe first.
Jn.3:14-15 actually says whosoever which defined by Strong's dictionary defines as anyone
G3956

πᾶς

pas

pas

Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.

Even though you refuse to see truth. I still try to get you to see that you are the one who is interpreting scripture. Not scripture interpreting scripture. you see it as you want and as Augustine wanted you to.Not as God intended and perhaps Arminians see this in Calvinist and choose to leave you to your own interpretations.All anyone can do is plant the seed if it doesn't grow it's not there fault.Maybe the next Christian will convince you.Point for point the Calvinist loose because you will never know that you can love as a choice of your own.If we have no choice then why are we given the choice.If we cannot believe on our own where is your proof, you have none.You are just assuming in your logic.


Romanbear

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by romanbear:
Hi Npetreley;
Since my smiley face offends you,

Offends me?!? Apparently your interpretation of scripture is exceeded only by your interpretation of me.

 

[4study]

npetreley,

I realize the impression of my comments leaves you disatisfied. It may seem like I'm "ignoring the challenge" but I must remind you that I do not believe in the Arminian view of "choice". I'm not going to defend a theology I believe is false.

 

[romanbear]

Npetreley;

I'm not here for a personal war with you. I'm here to discuss Bible doctrine. If you do not wish to answer my post then don't.You cannot claim that there is no one who will oppose your doctrine because I clearly have and you don't seem to know how to answer.Prove if you can the unconditional part of election. You can't.... I agree about the election I just don't agree about unconditional .Show me in scripture where it says we have no choice....Prove grace is irresistible....Prove Christ didn't die for all people on this planet.

This verse is a thorn in the side of Calvinist.because it gives us the choice to open the door.It also says any man.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Rev 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

We have decisions to make and it seems to me that Calvinist just like the Catholic Church doesn't want people to make any decisions for Christ.Have you made a decision for Christ? Let me urge you to do so.it'll change your life just like it did mine.You are a very intelligent person. I just don't understand why, when confronted, you come back with sarcasm.

Romanbear

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by romanbear:
If you do not wish to answer my post then don't.

There's nothing in your post that hasn't been answered by me and others several times. It doesn't matter whether you see it as "whosoever believes" or "everyone who believes," ar any other reasonable translation. Calvinists don't disagree with this statement at all. They simply don't agree with Arminians that it is appropriate to add anything to it, such as "if it is addressed to everyone, then everyone must have the free will to respond."

Originally posted by romanbear:
You cannot claim that there is no one who will oppose your doctrine because I clearly have and you don't seem to know how to answer.

Where are you dreaming up these things? I never claimed any such thing. I stated quite clearly that Arminians do not drill down through scripture to provide a detailed defense of their doctrine. And clearly they don't. As is illustrated above, it is one thing to say that the word is "pas" and means "anyone" or "everyone". It is another to show that "everyone is enabled to respond". And that unresolved assumption remains to be demonstrated from scripture.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Okay, now fill in the gap. It says "if any man hear my voice", not "if any man decide to hear my voice". Don't base your conclusions on inference, demonstrate that everyone has the ability to hear His voice, and be prepared to respond to all the scriptures that clearly say otherwise.

Likewise for all your chosen scriptures -- you have inferred from them "free will" but have yet to demonstrate that the inference has any merit.

 

[romanbear]

Hi Npetreley;
But you haven't demostrated that we can't hear or decide to hear.
Romanbear

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by romanbear:
Hi Npetreley;
But you haven't demostrated that we can't hear or decide to hear.
Romanbear

If the text doesn't say it, what necessitates further proof that it doesn't say it?

 

[romanbear]

Hi Npetreley;
You will also notice the the word "open" implies a decison for action because the door must be opened before Christ can come in
Romanbear

 

[romanbear]

Hi Npetreley;
It doesn't say what you think it says.This verse certainly does not support your Calvinist views even when you infer that it says something else other than the way it reads
Romanbear

 

[sturgman]

Hey Romanbear,

Do me a favor and post who this scripture was written too?

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.


Let me know if it was,

A) Every person who walked the earth.
B) The church of Laodicea - aka abody of believers.

If the first, then you might have a point, if the second then he is speking to the church and this does not make it a matter of justification but of sanctification.

Clarify this for us.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by romanbear:
Hi Npetreley;
You will also notice the the word "open" implies a decison for action because the door must be opened before Christ can come in
Romanbear

Yes, this is typical Arminian handling of scripture. First, you ignore the fact that "if anyone hears my voice" necessarily precedes the opening of the door. Second, you do not deal with the issue of whether or not everyone is enabled to hear His voice. Third, having ignored the requisite ability to hear, you still go on to somehow deduce from a logical "decision for action" that man must have the ability or inclination to decide for this specific action.

And then finally, instead of presenting one word of scripture in defense of all these assumptions -- which is what I had asked for in the first place -- you say that the burden is upon me to show from scripture that we cannot hear or decide to hear!!

At the risk of getting off track (remember, this was supposed to be an exercise for Arminians to defend their doctrine from scripture, not for the opposition to defend theirs), here you go:

Deuteronomy 29:4
But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear.

John 8:47
He who is of God hears God's words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.

Proverbs 20:12
Ears that hear and eyes that see-the LORD has made them both.

This next one is subtle, but I love it.

Isaiah 32:1 See, a king will reign in righteousness and rulers will rule with justice.
2 Each man will be like a shelter from the wind
and a refuge from the storm, like streams of water in the desert and the shadow of a great rock in a thirsty land.
3 Then the eyes of those who see will no longer be closed, and the ears of those who hear will listen.

Matthew 11:15 and MANY other places...
He who has ears, let him hear.

Has ears? Not "He who decides to hear?" Not "He who has ears, let him decide to hear?"

Matthew 13:10...
10 The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?"
11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. ... 13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

Romans 11:8
as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day."

 

[sturgman]

Only 10 scriptures? What does that prove?

They gave you the word "open"!

 

[romanbear]

Hi sturgman;
Are you challenging me to zee dual? a little humor there to break the ice.
The letter is to the church of Ladociea and the church is not a church we will see in heaven unless they repent.This not just a matter of justification for just a few.The church of Ladoicea was lost because if they don't repent they are spewed out of his mouth because they are luke warm. You cannot be saved without repentance.Even if you open the door.It's obvious to me that the Church in question was lost what say you?If lost then this verse applies to everyone.After all belonging to a church does not make you one of the elect does it. This next verse also implies everyone.
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Notice it doesn't say just a few Calvinist.It says "whosoever", define in the strongs dictionary as anyone, or all.

On Guard

Romanbear

 

[4study]

npetreley,

I do not necessarily agree with romanbear’s usage of Rev. 3:20. Nor do a necessarily disagree with your (and sturgman’s) rebuttals. Yet with all due respect, I don’t see how your scripture references prove anything.

Deuteronomy 29:4 – Context? This concerns Israel, the chosen nation of God. How are you applying this?

John 8:47 – Phrase “of God” or “not of God”, I assume you’re saying this means “born again” or “lost. Where do you get this conclusion? Context?

Proverbs 20:12 – So? This doesn’t say anything about God predestinating some to “hear and see”.

Isaiah 32:1 – Context? Again concerns the covenant people of God? Doesn’t say anything concerning human ability.

Matthew11:15 and MANY other places – This phrase is a command and doesn’t say anything about human ability.

Matthew 13:10 – Again, says nothing of human ability. This refers back to Israel, the covenant people of God.

Romans 11:8 – Same as above. All about Israel, the covenant people of God.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by romanbear:
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Notice it doesn't say just a few Calvinist.It says "whosoever", define in the strongs dictionary as anyone, or all.

On Guard

Romanbear

Again, you're not saying anything about which Calvinists would disagree. What you fail to see is that ALL is qualified by WHO CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD. The verse says nothing about how one gets to the point where one would call on the name of the Lord, i.e., where one gets the inclination or ability to do so. This is where Calvinists and Arminians differ, and you have yet to provide a single verse that attributes this to free will.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by 4study:
npetreley,

I do not necessarily agree with romanbear’s usage of Rev. 3:20. Nor do a necessarily disagree with your (and sturgman’s) rebuttals. Yet with all due respect, I don’t see how your scripture references prove anything.

Deuteronomy 29:4 – Context? This concerns Israel, the chosen nation of God. How are you applying this?

John 8:47 – Phrase “of God” or “not of God”, I assume you’re saying this means “born again” or “lost. Where do you get this conclusion? Context?

Proverbs 20:12 – So? This doesn’t say anything about God predestinating some to “hear and see”.

Isaiah 32:1 – Context? Again concerns the covenant people of God? Doesn’t say anything concerning human ability.

Matthew11:15 and MANY other places – This phrase is a command and doesn’t say anything about human ability.

Matthew 13:10 – Again, says nothing of human ability. This refers back to Israel, the covenant people of God.

Romans 11:8 – Same as above. All about Israel, the covenant people of God.

I knew there would be a risk of getting sidetracked, but that's my fault for allowing someone to hijack the thread into a defense of Calvinism.

Again, what I said in my opening post was that I am sure people can interpret supporting scriptures like the above differently and debate them. We've already spent a lot of time debating the above verses, and we can continue to do so in other threads.

But the point I made was that Calvinists are starved for the opportunity to debate the supporting verses on the Arminian side. Where are all the supporting scriptures that must come after the starting scripture that supplies only inference?

Do you still not understand the concept here? You take one scripture, which leaves questions unanswered. You attempt to answer the questions with other scriptures. Those may leave some questions unanswered, so you attempt to answer them with still more scriptures.

I've seen several one-shot attempts at scriptural support for free will. But I'm still waiting for the long list of verses that support the inferences and answer these questions! Where are they? Why is everyone having so much trouble presenting any of these supporting scriptures?

 

[4study]

npetreley,

There have been just as many debates on the John 3:16's, the "all"'s, and the "whosoever wills". So I'm not sure what you're looking for from anyone. I've noticed as well that in these debates, you and many others, use scriptures like those you just referenced as rebuttals.

You posted your scrptures as a result of romanbear's "burden of proof" request, correct? So if you decide to post scripture to prove your point, why not discuss them? IMO, they prove just about as much as those scriptures used by Arminians to support their points.

 

[romanbear]

Hi Npetreley;
You quoted duet.29:4
Who was He talking with was it Gentiles or the people who followed him in to the desert.It's obvious you have made this in to something it is not.This verse was sarcasm from Moses to the Jews.The next verse Jn 8:47 was addressed to the Pharasee'sProverbs 20 :12 Yes he did make ears to hear and eyes to see Isaiah 32:1-3. I know your going to tell me that this is what says it all Yes and this is what it says
Isa 32:1 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment.
Isa 32:2 And a man shall be as a hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
Isa 32:3 And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall hearken.
Mat 11:15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Except what he says is if they have ears let them hear.

And good old rom 11 : 8 Paul was talking about the blindness of the Jews.
You still have shown nothing that backs up a single thing you are claiming you are intrepting the scripture when you go back and read each verse they say something else. Not what you say.You got to do better than this, I'm really disapointed.May be no Arminians want to argue over what you think scripture says or wish it to say.You see I'm not an Arminian I'm a Christian I go by the Bible not men.
Romanbear

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by 4study:
npetreley,

There have been just as many debates on the John 3:16's, the "all"'s, and the "whosoever wills".

Why is this such a hard concept to understand? The "whosoevers" and "alls" are the starting point. One such verse may clearly state that "whosoever believes", but only Arminians see an inference that this means one decides to believe. That's why you need the NEXT scripture to establish that this inference has merit. Then if that NEXT scripture leaves questions unanswered, you need ANOTHER scripture, etc.

The "ears to hear" quotes were FOLLOW-UP scriptures to fill in the gap from a PREVIOUS scripture. All your "whosoevers" and "alls" stand alone. Why? Because what the Arminians have been providing, instead, is the "whosoever" scripture, after which no support whatsoever is offered except inference, imagination, and claims of personal revelation. They may sometimes offer a new starting point, but the unanswered questions of the previous starting point have remained unsupported by scripture, as does the next one.

Is the difference in approach really such a difficult thing to understand?

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by romanbear:
Hi Npetreley; ...disputes about my choice of supporting verses...

Wonderful! You've demonstrated what I said at least three times we already know - that you can disagree with the long string of supporting scriptures for Calvinism.

Now -- where's your list of supporting scriptures for the verses you presented, so we can give them the same scrutiny? We know you have inferred something from "pas". Now where's your scriptural support that the fact that "whoever believes" means anyone can have the inclination or ability to choose to believe of their own free will without the enabling power of God? Will whosoever believes that there is an inference that we have free will please provide those scriptures? Anyone? Anyone? Ferris?