Calvinism's fatal flaw

[Frogman]

Your claim that we have not, or will not address your question prevents our addressing it. I answered earlier that I don't see your point, not because you have confused your explanation, or that I have. I simply mean I don't agree with you.

Your opening post brings your argument from John 15.16 and John 17 (the prayer of Christ). I attempted to address the context of these, at least in the prayer in my last post, you dismissed this. As long as you are the one who defines hermaneutics your argument is valid.

You begin by attempting to show that Christ in his prayer at John 17 differentiates the treatment of the apostles and ourselves by Christ. You say this difference lies in the two phrases: "those who believe by their message" (these being anyone not of the original apostles and including ourselves; claiming none to have been elected except the apostles). Next you show us: "ones whom the Father had given him." This is to offer proof that only the apostles were elected because they were given to Christ from the Father. (These two phrases are found at vs. 20 for the first and vss. 6 & 9 for the latter.

Underlying your premise that only the apostles (and certain others throughout scriptural revelation) have been elected, and this because they were granted special positions in order to fulfill the office to which they are appointed. Your failure brother is that you have not shown proof that no other is elected, regardless of the special gifts or lack thereof.

Jesus himself refutes the claims you are making. John 17.6 he says: "thine they were, and thou gavest them me." vs. 9: "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine." vs 10: "And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them."

In context of the prayer of Christ vs. 10 clearly states that all who are Christ's were first God's possession; and all who are Christ's are God's. This follows because the Father and the Son are one. Christ also prays for all those who will believe because of the message of apostles, as you do point out. This prayer is not that these will believe, but rather because they will believe they are prayed for beforehand by their intercessor; this because He is leaving the world, but they shall remain in the world though saved.

You also offered us ch. 15.16. This scripture being spoken immediately in context to the apostles, according to your view, we can disregard the entire chapter. note that Jesus said I call you not servants but from henceforth call you friends; according to your view only those in his presence are to be called his friends. This is also the chapter which admonishes us to remain in him that we may bring forth fruit, without him we can do nothing, but, since this is speaking directly to the apostles I can disregard this scripture as well and thus set about to perform my own will and call it a service to God. We can also assume since this is spoken to the apostles alone that Christs sacrifice and atonement applies only to them; After all it is they he called friends and not ourselves.

Taken together as such I find your view to be one not refuting Calvinism, and supporting Arminianism, but one which proclaims there is no sacrifice outside the circle of the twelve, I mean eleven, as we know the prayer of Christ does mention Judas.

As for the rest of us, we are left to read this novel book so many love and adore, but unable to hope for the salvation we read of upon its pages.

You also stated these were only the beginning of the verses which supported your claim. I don't believe you can even claim this to your defense.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[Primitive Baptist]

Does this mean that the apostles did not have "free will" but the rest of mankind does? I really hope that is not the view that you are entertaining.

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by Primitive Baptist:
Does this mean that the apostles did not have "free will" but the rest of mankind does? I really hope that is not the view that you are entertaining.

Of course you know that depends on what you mean by "is."

Bro. Dallas

 

[William C]

Originally posted by Frogman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Primitive Baptist:
Does this mean that the apostles did not have "free will" but the rest of mankind does? I really hope that is not the view that you are entertaining.

Of course you know that depends on what you mean by "is."

Bro. Dallas </font>[/QUOTE]Haaa, that really was funny Dallas

Seriously, to answer your question, I believe the Apostles were "effectually called" because it was apart of God's divine plan of redemption. That was not going to be left up to man's human decisions. It was a unique Sovereign act of divine intervention. I don't believe everyone who is saved is "effectually called" like Peter and Paul were for example.

In other words, Paul's will was most definitly violated. Paul's will was to kill Christians and God Sovereignly intervened and changed his will. I realize that the Calvinist will argue that we all have a will that is turned against God and that He must Sovereignly change it. I agree, God must change our desires, but I believe that he does that following our faith which comes through the hearing of the gospel. The apostles were unique because there wasn't a "gospel" message for them to hear and believe because no one was preaching it yet. Then means of ushering in the New Covenant had not yet been established as it is today.

Today the gospel has been established through the working of God's divinly appointed apostles, so there is not a need for Him to act in the same way as He did during the Apostolic Age.

Most Calvinist I've talked to beleive that God gave unique gifts to the apostles for the purpose of establishing the church.

Why? Why give the apostle's the ability to perform miracles? If God is going to Sovereignly and effectually call all of his elect when they here the apostle's message, then why would He need to gift them with such miraculous abilities? Could it be that God wanted the Apostles to have the divine ability to persuade men through signs and wonders to believe their message so that they could establish a foundation for the church?

What does the Calvinist think?

Bro. Bill

 

[Frogman]

Why? Why give the apostle's the ability to perform miracles? If God is going to Sovereignly and effectually call all of his elect when they here the apostle's message, then why would He need to gift them with such miraculous abilities? Could it be that God wanted the Apostles to have the divine ability to persuade men through signs and wonders to believe their message so that they could establish a foundation for the church?

Or maybe as a witness against Israel to provoke that nation to jealousy? This is what I would accept.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[William C]

Originally posted by sturgman:
Again bro billy,

You are doing nothing more than saying we are wrong, and your only evidence is your viewpoint. When we present scripture, you deny those scriptures and say "maybe they were not written to us?" but other than that you have no evidence to prove us wrong. The burden of proof lies with you. And by the way, I haven't even heard your position. What is it anyway? How does God elect then?

Sturgman, I'm saying that you are appling a poor hermeneutical principle to your interpretation. What if my view that God only elected the first disciples during the Apostlic age was the orthodox postion of the majority of Christians? Then the burden would be on you to prove your position, which really you can't do obviously or you would have done it, and that is my point. This arguement can't be scripturally refuted because scripture was not addressing this question.

So, I guess I'm trying to make you ask yourself, what if I'm wrong? What if God was teaching us in the NT about the effectual calling of the apostles and not necessarily of everyone who believes? That is the question which no one can sufficiently answer.

And I submit that really the burden IS on you. Why?

Let's take John 15:16 for example: "You did not choose me but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit."

My position: God elects or chooses to effectually call the apostles.

Calvinist position: God elects or chooses to effectually call the apostles and all future believers.

Fact: Jesus was speaking to the apostles.

Assumption: Jesus meant this for everyone who believes.

You're position rests upon an assumption. My position rests upon a fact. Therefore, the burden is yours.

With Respect,
Bro. Bill

 

[William C]

Originally posted by Frogman:

Or maybe as a witness against Israel to provoke that nation to jealousy? This is what I would accept.

You don't think Gentiles believing the message that Israel had rejected (by their will) would provoke that nation to jealousy? It's the Gentiles belief that would provoke Israel's jealousy, not the miraculous signs.

Bro. Bill

 

[Frogman]

the miraculous signs.

At the same time these were for witness to Israel, Gentiles had been "believing" in the God of Israel for longer than this. But this new doctrine is the one which they believed in greater numbers; this I think as to Israel naturally was considered as ignorance of the Law and Prophets (the oracles of God) which had been given to that nation. Because of this, I think the miraculous signs were a greater witness to Israel.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[William C]

Originally posted by Frogman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> the miraculous signs.

At the same time these were for witness to Israel, Gentiles had been "believing" in the God of Israel for longer than this. But this new doctrine is the one which they believed in greater numbers; this I think as to Israel naturally was considered as ignorance of the Law and Prophets (the oracles of God) which had been given to that nation. Because of this, I think the miraculous signs were a greater witness to Israel.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas </font>[/QUOTE]But isn't it clear in Romans that it's the Gentiles "ingrafting" or "belief" that provokes the jealousy? I'm still not understanding your answer. Why did God give the apostles special gifting?
Thanks, I'm really not trying to argue so much as understand your viewpoint.

With respect,
Bro. Bill

 

[Bro. James Reed]

I would like to put something forth. We have numerous examples, given by Christ and the Apostles, showing that we are called by grace.

The one I would like to put forward is the example of Lazarus. The Bible says we are dead in trespasses and in sins. Well, the example of Lazarus is a metaphor of our salvation. Lazarus was dead. Jesus delayed coming to him for three days, to prove that the work was his own and not that of any other man. He went to the tomb and said, "Lazarus, come forth." Lazarus immediately came out of the tomb, wrapped in grave clothes.

This is pointing to us. We were dead in our own sins, and unable to bring about our own salvation. Jesus had to call us out of darkness. Did Lazarus choose to listen to Jesus? No, he was dead. Did Lazarus bring himself out of death? No, that's ridiculous. Then, how can you expect a lowly man, in an even lower death than that of Lazarus, to bring himself out of darkness into light?

By grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.

I think you need to be careful about boasting that you saved yourself. My dear brother, with all due respect, you have absolutely no power, and thus, no right, to say you can save yourself. That is shameful. However, on the same hand, I can not take glory for knowing the truth. It is solely the gift of God placed in my heart. I am thankful that God has shown me the truth. I will pray for you, and the others that would like to take the power away from God and give it to man.

God Bless. Bro. James

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Bro. James Reed:
The one I would like to put forward is the example of Lazarus. The Bible says we are dead in trespasses and in sins.

Amen, bro.

Romans 8:6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace;

Or, to translate the Greek literally, to be flesh minded is death, but to be spirit minded is life and peace.

7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. 8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

It's one or the other. Either your mind is controlled by the flesh and you are dead, or your mind is controlled by Christ and you are alive. And if you have the Spirit of Christ, you belong to Him. If you don't have the Spirit of Christ, then you don't belong to Him. I see no mention whatsoever of some inbetween state where your dead mind somehow decides it wants to be born of Christ and is motivated to "invite Him into your heart."

 

[William C]

Originally posted by Bro. James Reed:
I would like to put something forth. We have numerous examples, given by Christ and the Apostles, showing that we are called by grace.

The one I would like to put forward is the example of Lazarus. The Bible says we are dead in trespasses and in sins. Well, the example of Lazarus is a metaphor of our salvation. Lazarus was dead. Jesus delayed coming to him for three days, to prove that the work was his own and not that of any other man. He went to the tomb and said, "Lazarus, come forth." Lazarus immediately came out of the tomb, wrapped in grave clothes.

This is pointing to us. We were dead in our own sins, and unable to bring about our own salvation. Jesus had to call us out of darkness. Did Lazarus choose to listen to Jesus? No, he was dead. Did Lazarus bring himself out of death? No, that's ridiculous. Then, how can you expect a lowly man, in an even lower death than that of Lazarus, to bring himself out of darkness into light?

That's a nice analogy to support your view, unfortunately for you the scripture never makes the same comparison that you have. The reason Jesus waited to allow Lazurus to die was to show the power of God so that He would be glorified and so those who witnessed this miracle would believe he was truly the Son of God. There is no mention of salvation being compared to Lazarus' raising from the dead.

I think you need to be careful about boasting that you saved yourself. My dear brother, with all due respect, you have absolutely no power, and thus, no right, to say you can save yourself. That is shameful. However, on the same hand, I can not take glory for knowing the truth. It is solely the gift of God placed in my heart. I am thankful that God has shown me the truth. I will pray for you, and the others that would like to take the power away from God and give it to man.

Arminians don't believe they can save themselves, neither do I. We are saved by grace through faith, just as you have stated. The difference is that we believe God allows man decide for himself wether he will act on his faith in Christ. Mere belief is not faith as James 2 teaches. Faith shows itself in obedience which is not forced by God, as your doctrine implies.

Just what is there for me to boast about, if God did all of the atoning work on the cross and it has been applied to me through the means of faith. I didn't earn salvation through the works of the law, that is the reason I can't boast. Old Covenant was (in a sense) understood that ones righteousness came from obiedence to the law. The New Covenant is applied through faith, not the works of the law, which is the issue Paul in addressing in Eph. 2. He is not addressing God's forcing people to believe in and obey him as your doctrine implies.

With Respect,
Bro. Bill

 

[Yelsew]

This is pointing to us. We were dead in our own sins, and unable to bring about our own salvation. Jesus had to call us out of darkness. Did Lazarus choose to listen to Jesus? No, he was dead. Did Lazarus bring himself out of death? No, that's ridiculous. Then, how can you expect a lowly man, in an even lower death than that of Lazarus, to bring himself out of darkness into light?

A completely bogus analogy. Lazarus was dead in the flesh, Jesus demonstrated his power over the flesh (He created the flesh) by raising Lazarus from the dead recalling Lazarus spirit to the flesh so that what was risen would not simply be animated flesh, but rather the lazarus they had known and loved. That is why the Scribes and Pharasees taunted Jesus on the cross as they did. "He raised the dead, but cannot take himself from the cross".

We are dead in sin, not a lower, but higher death, meaning that our spirit, because of sin, is separated from God who is Spirit. A separation like unto death. OUR spirit is not dead, but it is separated from God because of sin. We are powerless to remove the sin from our spirit, but we are not powerless to respond to God. We do, with free will choose to believe in Jesus, the Son of God, The Christ. By so doing, we become sanctified, that is, set apart from those who refuse to believe. Even the most vile of sinners can of his own free will respond to God.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
We are dead in sin, not a lower, but higher death, meaning that our spirit, because of sin, is separated from God who is Spirit. A separation like unto death. OUR spirit is not dead, but it is separated from God because of sin.

Wow - doesn't all that spinning make you dizzy? First we are dead in sin, then our spirit really isn't dead, but it's like unto death because it's separated from God (no doubt based on a scripture from the TBV, Totally Bogus Version).

Next you're going to say we're not really like unto death, but our spiritual feet have fallen asleep.

 

[Yelsew]

Spiritual death in humans is separation from the source of spiritual life, God.

When you understand what being made in the image of God means, you may understand what being dead in sin really means.

But alas, your understanding may take a good long while in coming.

 

[Frogman]

do you understand what was involved in the original creation of which Adam is a part of; and then what it was that happened as a result of Adam's action in eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and then do you understand that the Lord Jesus is the only other man to have a body prepared for him apart from the union of two sinful creatures; and that you and I are born and not created in the way that Adam was. Because of our position we are not created, man was created in the image of God, but that man sinned against God. What is the image of God? God is Three Persons; but these three are one. Man has been created with body, soul, and spirit, as a result of the fall these are in bondage to sin; God is not in bondage, man is not one in these three, each are warring against the other, the emotions, the flesh, the strong spirit of man, they are all working for their own purposes and ends, regardless of the actions needed to obtain to those ends, man satisfies his own desires; but he was created solely for the Glory of God. He rebels against this purpose and chooses as did his father Adam to remain in darkness. Christ did covenant with the Father to offer Himself as a sacrifice to do what man cannot do. In this way alone is man redeemed and in this way alone can he be restored to his original image, and will even be greater than that.

All this image of God man possesses will be restored in the resurrection.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

A fanciful way of supporting your belief that man is not worthy, not capable, cannot do what man is responsible to do.

My response is posted all over the Calvinism/Arminianism Debate Forum.

 

[Ray Berrian]

The dead corpse concept probably was carried into the theological world in a casket by six Calvinistic types like: Drs. Charles Hodge, John Piper, J.I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, Loraine Boettner, Arthur W. Pink with John Murry leading the deceased into American seminaries. Through the autopsy they try to structure the concept of "Total Depravity" or subtitled: "Total Inability."

Human inability portrayed as a dead corpse are inadmissible in the theological room of Biblical exegesis. It is God's full intention to draw sinners to Himself by the Spirit of God. He is the Advocate on the earth who brings about a sinner's new birth and is the one who also ministers to His saints via the Spirit, while Christ is the saints Advocate in Heaven who intercedes for us.

The truest theological settings are where the professors teach words like believe, [John 5:24] trust and hold dearly the words of Jesus who says if you but believe in Me and or receive Me [John 1:12] you will receive your assurance [Romans 8:16] of everlasting life. [I John 5:13]

 

[Frogman]

'Fanciful'?

Is this not recorded in your Bible Yelsew? From your arguments you sound as if man didn't really sin against God; or at best when he fell he only bruised his knee rather than falling over a precipice which has no bottom. Call it fanciful if you wish but please read your Bible; or get one.

God told Adam what to eat and what not to eat. And He told Adam he would die if eating what he was told not to eat; I would guess Adam had the same thoughts I have seen on this board when Eve brought to him the fruit of that tree and he saw that she was not dead (obviously) and thus it added strength the argument of deception satan utilized.

Yet as a result of his decision to eat, Adam did die and had to be quickened by God just like all of us who have been born of man since we are dead; born spiritually dead and with every breath we take one moment closer to our last. Still only God can quicken;

'fanciful' fanciful is asking children "What Would Jesus Do?" rather than telling them What He Did Do because it will frighten them and make them feel bad about themselves.

Does your Bible read that God accepted the covering Adam provided for himself and his wife to cover their nakedness (which they only knew of because of thier disobedience); The Bible says God did not accept this and He won't accept any covering I offer today either; The garment can only be the seamless garment of the Righteousness of God which Christ Jesus; it cannot have any mixture of any kind or it cannot be seamless and thus will not endure to the end.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

Frogman,
You must not be "hearing" what I've said as your remarks obviously point out.

What did Adam have to work with? He did not "grow up" learning the lessons of life. He was fully Grown with no "experiential knowledge". He had never seen death, for no one had ever died in his presence, and he had not seen the result of death and thus had no hint of what "you shall surely die" may mean, so it did not create in him a dread as it would you and I.

Your Adam, it seems, has a PHd in Theology and Humanity, a fully developed and experienced human. My Adam is total innocense, a child in wonderland. I believe that God was delighting immensely in the relationship that He had with Adam in the manner that a New Father delights in very young child. So the command to not eat of the fruit of the trees in the midst of the garden would carry the same weight with Adam that you telling your inexperienced child to not do something carries.

The woman God gave to Adam, from Adam, to be a helpmate, was given the same attributes of spirit that Adam was given, not greater knowledge or experience, no greater awareness.

In other words, they were brand new humans with no resume! They were presented with information they were not necessarily equipped to handle, as we all are. The result is they did disobey the command of God which is S I N! Which is what we all do!

The result of that sin, disobedience, is that Adam and Eve's sinless relationship with God was severed by the sin. Thus God views sinful man as dead.

Man is not dead, man's spirit is not dead, for the life of the flesh is spirit (not the Holy Spirit, but human spirit). When Man dies, the spirit is released from the flesh, and Paul says that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Paul knew all about our life as spirit.

So what did God do about our sinfulness? He, in his Grace made a way whereby we can be restored to him through His only begotten son Jesus. And that the Blood of His son cleanses us who believe from all spots and blemishes. It is our belief in Jesus that restores the spirit relationship with God that Adam and Eve once knew. And belief is available to all who will.

If you have interpreted the scriptures to mean something else, then the burden is upon you alone, and not those who do not agree with you. The vast majority of Christians (those who believe in Christ) do not agree with you!