Calvinism... THE SEQUEL!

[tragic_pizza]

I needed to respond to Heavenly Pilgrim's post in reply to my assertion concerning Reformed thology:

HP: I respectfully disagree. As I understand reformed theology, what it terms as free will is no free will at all. ‘Freedom to do as one wills’ as is often stated, is no freedom at all. One can only do as one wills. Freedom must of necessity lie antecedent to the doing if it exists at all, in the choice and formation of intents. The will of man sustains to the doing the relationship of necessity. No freedom exists between the two in the least.

I would argue that you don't understand Reformed theology at all, and firther that you're speaking in circles.

Are you saying that we are slaves to our will?

Interesting, because, were this so, no one would ever "will" to come to Christ, now would they? Or is that a function of slavery to God's will -- we have no choice, thus we are either functionaries of flesh or of the Divine?

That's not at all what Reformed theology teaches. Scripturally, we are told to refrain from certain acts and ways of thinking (though our "will" may be to act and think thusly). Clearly, we either have a "choice" in these things, or God is particularly cruel and enjoys toying with us. Similarly, we are assured in Scripture that the reward for persevering in the faith (though our "will" may want otherwise) is eternal life.

There are books out there which very clearly explain, in some detail, Reformed theology from a reformed perspective. Perhaps spending some time reading them, instead of simply regurgitating what non-Reformed people tell you we think, would be a good idea.

 

[Claudia_T]

Do Calvinists think that it is actually God's will that some perish?


Matthew 18:
10: Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12: How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13: And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14: Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Do Calvinists think that it is actually God's will that some perish?


Matthew 18:
10: Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12: How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13: And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14: Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

I can't speak for all strains of Calvinism. That's why I am specifying Reformed theology.

And as far as Reformed theology goes, no, we do most certainly not think that "it is actually God's will that some perish."

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

Good points TP. ​

As a follow up to some of the prior posts, the fact that there are five points simply goes back to the fact that there were five Arminian points of protest presented to the Synod of Dort. Though there are five points of Calvinism, they are really inseparable. There is really only one point to be made: God saves sinners. ​

According to JI Packer, the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is more than simply emphasis.​

• One proclaims a God who saves. The other speaks of a God who enables man to save himself.
• One makes salvation the work of God. The other on the work of man.
• One regards faith as part of God's gift of salvation. The other as man's own contribution to salvation.
• One gives all the glory to God. The other divides the praise between God (who built the machinery of salvation) and man (who by believing, operated it).

 

[Dustin]

I needed to respond to Heavenly Pilgrim's post in reply to my assertion concerning Reformed thology:



I would argue that you don't understand Reformed theology at all, and firther that you're speaking in circles.

Are you saying that we are slaves to our will?

Interesting, because, were this so, no one would ever "will" to come to Christ, now would they? Or is that a function of slavery to God's will -- we have no choice, thus we are either functionaries of flesh or of the Divine?

That's not at all what Reformed theology teaches. Scripturally, we are told to refrain from certain acts and ways of thinking (though our "will" may be to act and think thusly). Clearly, we either have a "choice" in these things, or God is particularly cruel and enjoys toying with us. Similarly, we are assured in Scripture that the reward for persevering in the faith (though our "will" may want otherwise) is eternal life.

There are books out there which very clearly explain, in some detail, Reformed theology from a reformed perspective. Perhaps spending some time reading them, instead of simply regurgitating what non-Reformed people tell you we think, would be a good idea.
[/font][/color]

A.W. Pink's "The Soveriegnty of God" is a great place to start. I borrowed that book from my brother and kept it for months until he asked for it back. It was an intense read, it forced me back to the Scripture to reevaluate all I thought I knew of them. Wish I still had it.

I found it online at this link: http://www.reformed.org/books/pink/

 

[Jarthur001]

SEQUEL...yeah... part 187,987,278 maybe....

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

FoS: According to JI Packer, the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is more than simply emphasis.

• One proclaims a God who saves. The other speaks of a God who enables man to save himself.
• One makes salvation the work of God. The other on the work of man.
• One regards faith as part of God's gift of salvation. The other as man's own contribution to salvation.
• One gives all the glory to God. The other divides the praise between God (who built the machinery of salvation) and man (who by believing, operated it).

HP: IF in fact these are words of JI Packer, he does not know whereof he speaks. He is either deceived or ignorant of the facts, or he could care less about the truth and his only desire is to fabricate paper ducks to shoot while making fodder for his own position. The latter is my guess.

 

[Jarthur001]

HP: IF in fact these are words of JI Packer, he does not know whereof he speaks. He is either deceived or ignorant of the facts, or he could care less about the truth and his only desire is to fabricate paper ducks to shoot while making fodder for his own position. The latter is my guess.

I agree...

With Packer that is.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JAuthur001: agree...

With Packer that is.

HP: Your kidding, right?:smilewinkgrin:

 

[tragic_pizza]

HP: IF in fact these are words of JI Packer, he does not know whereof he speaks. He is either deceived or ignorant of the facts, or he could care less about the truth and his only desire is to fabricate paper ducks to shoot while making fodder for his own position. The latter is my guess.

Well, Packer's ignorant of Arminianism, or of Calvinism? If the latter, it is you who are ignorant, as I've addressed.

 

[webdog]

Well, Packer's ignorant of Arminianism, or of Calvinism? If the latter, it is you who are ignorant, as I've addressed.

Based on this, he's more ignorant of the non calvinist position than many here on the BB. This is nothing more than 5 strawmen, that have been refuted many times before. It would help for Packer (and those who agree with him like James) to at least TRY to understand the non calvinist position before erecting the "man is sovereign" strawmen.

• One proclaims a God who saves. The other speaks of a God who enables man to save himself.
• One makes salvation the work of God. The other on the work of man.
• One regards faith as part of God's gift of salvation. The other as man's own contribution to salvation.
• One gives all the glory to God. The other divides the praise between God (who built the machinery of salvation) and man (who by believing, operated it).

 

[tragic_pizza]

Well, I would like for nonCalvinists to have a clue about Calvinism, too, but that hasn't happened yet.

 

[webdog]

Oh, it's happened, but pride will not allow for a calvinist to admit to such.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Oh, it's happened, but pride will not allow for a calvinist to admit to such.

Of course. Certainly, it has. Right.

Prove it. Demonstrate to me your grasp of Calvinism.

 

[webdog]

Of course. Certainly, it has. Right.

Prove it. Demonstrate to me your grasp of Calvinism.

Yeah, it's that simple that I can summarize it in one post. You've been around here a while, search through the old "C vs. A" forum or read the on going debates and discussions in the baptist theology section.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Yeah, it's that simple that I can summarize it in one post. You've been around here a while, search through the old "C vs. A" forum or read the on going debates and discussions in the baptist theology section.

I'm not allowed in the Baptist sections, so why bother digging in there.

What I've seen in the other threads hasn't impressed me at all. There is a vacuous lack of knowledge concerning Calvinism in general, and Reformed theology in particular. That this doesnt keep people from presuming knowledge is not surprising.

 

[webdog]

I'm not allowed in the Baptist sections, so why bother digging in there.

...because it would...

Demonstrate to me your grasp of Calvinism.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Excuse me?

How many years have you studied Reformed theology, webdog?

 

[webdog]

Does it really matter? Would it meet your criteria either way?

 

[tragic_pizza]

Does it really matter? Would it meet your criteria either way?

Well, you're making blanket statements about my grasp of Calvinism; unless you have some expertise in the area you are showing yourself to be a ......

(Do not call other members such names.)