Calvinist preachers, teachers, theologians

[webdog]

Actually, if what you began learning wasn't logical - would you have continued in it? I seriously doubt it, and nor would anyone else. Proper deduction and reasoning within logic allows for us to grasp and have cohesive understanding.


Actually, it does make ALOT of sense, just not to someone who will not see.
But let me show you something first, if I may:

You state:
God does foreknow everything that will happen because He has decreed that it will happen

Now within this construct we have a multitute of problems.
1. Man does not choose sin or fall and thereby bring condemation upon himself. Why? Because God decreed from the outset who will be condemed and by His decree they will fall into sin and not ever know Him. Ergo, He punishes those He fully intended to never know Him and thereby reject Him.

1 (a). IF God decrees and THEREFORE due to this already knows the outcome - you have succefully established double predestination which is a blatant heresy. As He does not FORSEE mans decision to reject Him, we have God making the decision for him and man just did as he was created to do - be condemed to hell before any are chosen. Then He only chooses SOME to show love to out of this group by which He created for the purpose destruction.

2. If God decrees man will fall, it IS NOT man that has chosen rebellion but that which was decreed he does (this includes Adams fall). Now we have mankind simply followin along (sorry, but robot analogy included here) doing what God decreed he WILL do (specifically Adam) and had no choice but to do what God created him to do. Now we have God being the author of sin. Why? Because God is the first cause of all things including sin.

2 (b). Now we just just impuned Gods righteousness, tainted His Holiness, and absolved God's love. For if God so decreed first - By the very nature of the statement He would then be the very author of sin and a partisipator of it. We, due to this same statement have God decreeing mankind to fall into sin and then giving this same creation who is doing what they were decreed to do - everlasting torment for being who He made them to be. [Unrigheous] Thereby tainting His Holiness for He would not be seperated from ungodliness being the very creator of it [Unholy] And since SOME where choosen for Heaven and many more for eternal torment by there very creator -

I have YET to hear a defencable view within Calvinism that does not make God the very author of sin. God will not tempt man TO sin nor does God cause man to sin.


Now what is most funny is I beleive the Calvinist has and hold the same truths I do, but our views as to the mechanics of their operation differ. We have differing VIEWS about the same immutable truths. This is just an area I don't agree with since it is mostly speculation anyway!

It's nice to see someone that can see past the most simple, basic problems of calvinism. Be prepared for the "you don't know what calvinism teaches" label....

 

[npetreley]

Actually my friend, you are the ONLY Calvinist I have MET (this includes those of and at the founders blog and Strange Baptist Fire - a group associated with the Founders and Calvinist Gadfly) that do not take what the scriptures states and by logic conclude and extrapolate the next obvious beleif within the Calvinistic Pardiagm. All of the Calvinists I know and have spoken with use logic as the basis for ALL that they believe!!

Wow! I'm almost speechless. I recommend that you read as many of the threads on calvinism vs. free-willism as you can. Almost all of the arguments I see against Calvinism are based on a handful of the same old quotes out of context and without scope, coupled with the logical extrapolation of a theological position. The arguments tend to be, "A loving God would not..." or "God would be unjust if He..." and so on.

In sharp contrast, most of the Calvinist arguments I've read take the form of countless scripture quotes considering the context, and usually the only logic that creeps in is the reasoning that: "That's what scripture says, and who are we to argue with God?"

 

[npetreley]

Actually, if what you began learning wasn't logical - would you have continued in it? I seriously doubt it, and nor would anyone else. Proper deduction and reasoning within logic allows for us to grasp and have cohesive understanding.


Actually, it does make ALOT of sense, just not to someone who will not see.
But let me show you something first, if I may:

You state:
God does foreknow everything that will happen because He has decreed that it will happen

Now within this construct we have a multitute of problems.
1. Man does not choose sin or fall and thereby bring condemation upon himself. Why? Because God decreed from the outset who will be condemed and by His decree they will fall into sin and not ever know Him. Ergo, He punishes those He fully intended to never know Him and thereby reject Him.

1 (a). IF God decrees and THEREFORE due to this already knows the outcome - you have succefully established double predestination which is a blatant heresy. As He does not FORSEE mans decision to reject Him, we have God making the decision for him and man just did as he was created to do - be condemed to hell before any are chosen. Then He only chooses SOME to show love to out of this group by which He created for the purpose destruction.

2. If God decrees man will fall, it IS NOT man that has chosen rebellion but that which was decreed he does (this includes Adams fall). Now we have mankind simply followin along (sorry, but robot analogy included here) doing what God decreed he WILL do (specifically Adam) and had no choice but to do what God created him to do. Now we have God being the author of sin. Why? Because God is the first cause of all things including sin.

2 (b). Now we just just impuned Gods righteousness, tainted His Holiness, and absolved God's love. For if God so decreed first - By the very nature of the statement He would then be the very author of sin and a partisipator of it. We, due to this same statement have God decreeing mankind to fall into sin and then giving this same creation who is doing what they were decreed to do - everlasting torment for being who He made them to be. [Unrigheous] Thereby tainting His Holiness for He would not be seperated from ungodliness being the very creator of it [Unholy] And since SOME where choosen for Heaven and many more for eternal torment by there very creator -

I have YET to hear a defencable view within Calvinism that does not make God the very author of sin. God will not tempt man TO sin nor does God cause man to sin.


Now what is most funny is I beleive the Calvinist has and hold the same truths I do, but our views as to the mechanics of their operation differ. We have differing VIEWS about the same immutable truths. This is just an area I don't agree with since it is mostly speculation anyway!

Never mind about reading the threads. You just gave a classic example of what I was talking about. No scripture. Just logic and extrapolation from a theological position (2b is just another way of saying "God would be unrighteous if...").

 

[Brother Bob]

 

[Allan]

That was the whole point when I stated at the very end:

This is just an area I don't agree with since it is mostly speculation anyway!

There is NO definitive scripture that states what specifically happens and the order by which it happens so it is just a LOGICAL conclusion that both sides will draw based upon the VIEW or theological bent. And yet it plays a significant part in the Calvinist view point.

Yeah, I realized that after the fact but figured someone would point it out and not address anyway.

Yea, I have seen all your countless scripture so far.

 

[Allan]

I will put this out there though,

Brother Bob - Scripture - innumerable

Any Calvinist I have seen Speaking with him - Scriptures very little.
and those who do never ANSWER the scriptures given!


I'm still new here but you will find I to post scripture as well;
for it is by scripture alone that truth can be known.

And I would take you to task on every scripture you give, just as I would expect you to do the same with me.

 

[npetreley]

There is NO definitive scripture that states what specifically happens and the order by which it happens so it is just a LOGICAL conclusion that both sides will draw based upon the VIEW or theological bent. And yet it plays a significant part in the Calvinist view point.

Proverbs 16:4
The LORD has made all for Himself, Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom.

 

[J.D.]

I will put this out there though,

Brother Bob - Scripture - innumerable

Any Calvinist I have seen Speaking with him - Scriptures very little.
and those who do never ANSWER the scriptures given!


I'm still new here but you will find I to post scripture as well;
for it is by scripture alone that truth can be known.

And I would take you to task on every scripture you give, just as I would expect you to do the same with me.

My first day on BB there was a post by Rippon with over 100 verses posted which proved unconditional election. The response? "Scripture doesn't prove anything".

So why should we waste our time posting scripture for the closed mind?

 

[webdog]

My first day on BB there was a post by Rippon with over 100 verses posted which proved unconditional election. The response? "Scripture doesn't prove anything".

So why should we waste our time posting scripture for the closed mind?

would you have a link to that post?

 

[Jarthur001]

Hello Allan,

I see you are out telling Calvinist what they believe again. Maybe one would be better to hear it from a Calvinist, not a non Calvinist. There is always great glory in the non Calvinist ranks when one tells the Calvinst their own faith..silly as it may be.

Actually, if what you began learning wasn't logical - would you have continued in it? I seriously doubt it, and nor would anyone else. Proper deduction and reasoning within logic allows for us to grasp and have cohesive understanding.

Logical thought plays a role in all of life. But it is wrong to think Calvin thought is the above the Bible. I hear this all the time from those that have not a clue about Calvinism.

My Faith is:....Sola Scriptura, .....Soli Deo Gloria, .........Solo Christo, ........Sola Gratis,........ Sola Fide. Now I could draw this out all day showing you why this is my faith....but for the point of the matter at hand, and me being lazy, I will not at this time. In short...

The Bible is the final Word of God........The Bible alone is the ultimate authority.
The Glory of God...........All of life is to be lived to the glory of God.
Christ Work on the Cross Saved....Christ is the only mediator between God and man.
Grace......Salvation by Gods grace and grace alone.
Faith (believe)........We are justification by faith and faith alone.

With this faith we have Salvation. We are to preach the Gospel. What is the Gospel that leads to salvation? Yes there are more points we can add to this list. But nothing we can add in order for one to be saved. The sum of this, is that no other points are needed to be called a Bible based faith that leads to true salvation.


The Bible alone is the ultimate authority....

Making a statement like this is HUGE. It may be easy to say "amen" to this statement, but this carries a major weight with it. This means that no church is the ultimate authority, or writing, or creed, or, system of thought. Again..we say "amen". This is not to say that the things on this just quoted list have no authority, for they do or they could. But all must be under the Word of God as the final authority. How about the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit will do and or act in authority of Gods Word. If you are told by the spirit to kill someone, know that it is not Holy Spirit that tells you this.

This holds true with theology. I posted on the BB the other day...

Theology is not the work of God, but the study of God by man. However, I would place limits to this study, in that not all systems work. The only 3 that I know of and would allow are Arminianism, Calvinism, and hyper-Calvinisim. True Arminianism is not a heresy. I do not think hyper-Calvinism is a heresy if you understand it. But what I do see as a heresy is full freewill. Arminians were 1 point Calvinist. We have people on this board that says mans will was left intact after the fall. This is over the top and fully not of our faith. It is heresy!!

Again this may be easy to say, "well...amen brother". Let me show you why I say this is huge. Though all other things we can add to the list of authority has some authority in them, all others must rest below the Bible. I am a Calvinist, but I can not EVER state that Calvinism is 100% unchanging. This would be wrong. Why, if it is based on the Bible? Theology is one step away from the Bible. Theology maybe right, but does not carry authority as the Bible does. As a matter of fact, each point of the system I would have levels of degrees in how much I place my faith in. In a Calvinist view of election It would be as high as one can get, without being 100%. As to the Calvinist view of atonement it is somewhat lower. I feel Calvinism is true, but if there is a lesser authority placed on the system of Calvinist, ...and we must do this, for we cannot have two masters ....and in the end, if the Bible does not support Calvinism, it is Calvinism that must change and not the Bible. So..then this means the lower authority of Theology is subject to change, if in fact the ultimate authority of the Bible says it needs to be changed.

This is true with all theology not just Calvinisim.

But one must know that theology, has set doctrine!! How then do we view this? We must view it the same way in order to be true to the Word of God. Not just once has theolohy set doctrine, but many times. The Trinity, the hypostatic union, rapture, despensationism....the list goes on. Each of these doctrines are based on Gods Word, but are set by system theology which is UNDER Gods Word. Therefore I say it is huge, for this means these doctrines can be changed if Gods Word calls for it. We cannot quote one passage that tells all that the Trinity is. We must build a system pulling from many passages in order to have the full doctrine of the Trinity. When we do this, we are writing theology friends!!!

Now...this "change" will never happen I'm sure, to things like the Trinity, but to place Gods Word in the position that it needs to be, we must view it this way. My degree of believe the doctrine of the Trinity, is so high that it cannot be placed into words. Yet, because I know it is based on a system, I place it under the ultimate authority of Gods Holy Word.

This you will find logic and truth...But based on Gods Holy Word. Calvinism is not based on logic, but does use logic. It is based on God Word.

Actually, it does make ALOT of sense, just not to someone who will not see.
But let me show you something first, if I may:

Of course it makes sense...Its the truth.

Now within this construct we have a multitute of problems.
1. Man does not choose sin or fall and thereby bring condemation upon himself. Why? Because God decreed from the outset who will be condemed and by His decree they will fall into sin and not ever know Him. Ergo, He punishes those He fully intended to never know Him and thereby reject Him.

Where as from the freewill point...God foreknows they will go to Hell, and still He makes. It changes nothing does it?

1 (a). IF God decrees and THEREFORE due to this already knows the outcome - you have succefully established double predestination which is a blatant heresy. As He does not FORSEE mans decision to reject Him, we have God making the decision for him and man just did as he was created to do - be condemed to hell before any are chosen. Then He only chooses SOME to show love to out of this group by which He created for the purpose destruction.

oh Brothers!!! This shows full lack of understanding of Calvinism. We are not robots. Calvinism does not teach this. It is the VIEW of the freewillers that THINK Calvinism is this way. We have been over this before.

2. If God decrees man will fall, it IS NOT man that has chosen rebellion but that which was decreed he does (this includes Adams fall). Now we have mankind simply followin along (sorry, but robot analogy included here) doing what God decreed he WILL do (specifically Adam) and had no choice but to do what God created him to do. Now we have God being the author of sin. Why? Because God is the first cause of all things including sin.

You fail to understand what sin is. Sin is NOT GOD. God did not make sin, nor does He make man sin. Man in a fallen state sins based on lust. Adam sinned because he HAD A WILL TO SIN!! Adam wanted to be just as God. It was decreed for God know this would happen when he placed the tree in the garden, and when He gave man a will to choose SIN!! Thank of it in a slow down view of time as man seees it. Man is made and in the hands of God. God can place man in the garden as is, or He can remove the tree and then place man in the Garden. God placed the tree in the garden knowing man would sin, for what ever reason He wanted to do so. With no will...with no tree...we are robots.

Today..Man still has a will, but not freewill. Man will sin...and sin...and sin. Mans heart is evil and will not come to God.

2 (b). Now we just just impuned Gods righteousness, tainted His Holiness, and absolved God's love. For if God so decreed first - By the very nature of the statement He would then be the very author of sin and a partisipator of it. We, due to this same statement have God decreeing mankind to fall into sin and then giving this same creation who is doing what they were decreed to do - everlasting torment for being who He made them to be. [Unrigheous] Thereby tainting His Holiness for He would not be seperated from ungodliness being the very creator of it [Unholy] And since SOME where choosen for Heaven and many more for eternal torment by there very creator -

Yes...you did tain Gods holiness. But this is your view, not a Calvinist Thanks for pointing out your error.

I have YET to hear a defencable view within Calvinism that does not make God the very author of sin. God will not tempt man TO sin nor does God cause man to sin.

Then you need to listen, for it has been told to you before.

Now what is most funny is I beleive the Calvinist has and hold the same truths I do, but our views as to the mechanics of their operation differ. We have differing VIEWS about the same immutable truths. This is just an area I don't agree with since it is mostly speculation anyway!

What is even funnier is you do NOT believe as we...we see this in your post above.


In Christ..james

 

[npetreley]

Theology is one step away from the Bible. Theology maybe right, but does not carry authority as the Bible does.

Amen. This is similar to the point I was making.

Furthermore, when you reinterpret the Bible through your theology, that makes your opinion TWO steps away from the Bible, and that often compounds the error. For example:

Bible (truth): God is love.
Theology (opinion): A loving God would offer salvation to everyone.
Improper hermeneutics in reinterpretation through the theological view (error): Therefore, one can only interpret the word "any" in "God is not willing that any should perish" to mean "any person who ever lived, lives, or will live -- all inclusive".

 

[whatever]

First, I doubt that any Calvinist uses logic as the basis for all that he believes. I think you overstated the case.

Actually, if what you began learning wasn't logical - would you have continued in it?

This is another kind of logical error, like I was talking about before. Do you really not know the difference between propositions being logical and propositions being based on logic rather than scripture?

 

[whatever]

You have just admitted to double predestination...what Pastor Larry so vehemently denies calvinism teaches. Chalk up another person who "doesn't know calvinism". Oh, wait...you're a calvinist....

I explicitly denied double predestination. What I affirm is not double predestination. If you think it is then that just shows your continued misunderstanding.

 

[Brother Bob]

Calvinist?

 

[Jarthur001]

Calvinist?

Bump up to the top....

 

[Pastor Larry]

To Webdog

You have just admitted to double predestination...what Pastor Larry so vehemently denies calvinism teaches. Chalk up another person who "doesn't know calvinism". Oh, wait...you're a calvinist....

I vehemently denied this? Let’s see what I actually said, all the way back on page 8.

So I would simply caution you about simplistic overgeneralizations. There are some Calvinists who believe what you have stated. But I don’t think it is the mainstream view, and it is certainly not a required view. Your view is supported only by logic, not by Scripture, since Scripture never speaks of God electing people to hell.

You see that? I said “some Calvinists believe that.” But you fail to make a difference between what is a core, indispensable part of Calvinism, and what things Calvinists might differ about while still being Calvinists. The precise connotation of “double predestination” is a discussion mostly about double election, that God’s elects some to heaven, and some to hell. As I pointed out, I believe people are predestined to hell because of their sin. They are not elected there. Most of the time we call it preterition, that God simply passes over the non-elect, and allows them to continue in their way.

So please be more careful in what you say. Strive to have a better understanding, even if you disagree.

BTW, I noticed you never did address the Bible’s statements about God loving and hating. You completely ignored it, after accusing me of talking out of both sides of my mouth.

Here is what the Scripture says about loving and hating. This was on page 8. I post it here to remind you to address it.

Romans 3:23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Psalm 5:5 The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity.

Can we not assert that God hates all since “all have sinned” and he “hates all who do iniquity”? These two verses together seem to clearly indicate that God hates all because all have sinned. Which verse would you like to declare untrue?

John 3:16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Can we not assert that God loves all, since he “loves the world.” Certainly you would not define the world as less than “all people,” would you? I wouldn’t.

So can we not assert from Scripture that God hates all and loves all?

You also ignored my questions about your assertions about what I preach. You accused me of not preaching what I believe, but then provided no proof of that. Why not? Are you admitting you don’t have any?

 

[Jim1999]

Theology is not apart from the Bible. It is understanding the Bible, written as the orderly garden of Gods word.

How can one rightly understand the Bible except it be organized?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

Romans 3:23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Psalm 5:5 The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity.

Can we not assert that God hates all since “all have sinned” and he “hates all who do iniquity”? These two verses together seem to clearly indicate that God hates all because all have sinned. Which verse would you like to declare untrue?

Neither verse is untrue, but your application of "hate" is. I believe it has been shown before on here that "hate" does not imply the absence of love as calvinism teaches. Sane and Miseo do not hold the same meaning as our english of the word hate.

Most of the time we call it preterition, that God simply passes over the non-elect, and allows them to continue in their way.

If He elects to pass over them...He has in fact "elected" them for their fate, for what they were created for, then. Non elect is actually an oxymoron.

You see that? I said “some Calvinists believe that

Do you believe in double predestination? If not, you deny that do you not? Maybe "vehemently" was not the best word to use, but at any rate it doesn't affect my "understanding" one bit.

 

[Jim1999]

Where is that so-called Calvinist that preaches that God is not love. That is His very nature. So is holiness. It is God's holiness that necessitates an hatred for sin. As I have said before, we preach the gospel to all, in order to reach the unknown elect of God. Love is not sidelined.

There is so much claptrap uttered about Calvinism, but generally just magnifies the lack of knowledge of both the scriptures and theology.

If I do not preach the whole gospel, then I am unworthy to call myself a servant of Truth; which is also God.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

As I have said before, we preach the gospel to all, in order to reach the unknown elect of God.

But do you tell them that they may possibly not be elect?