"Calvinist teach false doctrine".

My biggest issue with typical Cals is their near abhorant attitute to one-on-one confrontational witnessing, passing out tracts, inviting people to church, etc. Most, not all, Cal churches are small and are comprised of intellectuals discussing the "deeper things of God". Basically they KNOW alot but DO nothing to see the lost converted. They are LAZY. They love to read and talk, but actually knocking on a door? passing out a tract? talking to the person next to you on the plane about thier etenal destiny? EGAD - that's Arminianism at its worse.

Funny thing is, it seems those that have embraced the "Doctrines of Grace" were primarilly converted in a "fundamental" church, or they "come out of" fundamentalism.

So I guess my experience has been with 'hyper-calvinism'

 

==Most Calvinists I know witness on a regular basis. I don't know where people get this impression that Calvinists don't. Maybe there are more hyperCalvinists out there than I thought. Five point Calvinists witness. In fact some of the great preachers/teachers of history were five point Calvinists. I think of Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield as two good examples.

==Most Arminian churches are small as well. The size of a church does not determine it's effectivness.

==That is simply untrue. It is a perfect example of what I said earlier in this thread about people who don't understand Calvinism trying to condemn it. I think of James White. He is out at the Mormon convention every single year talking to people, passing out tracks, standing there all day. What are the nonCalvinists doing? Screaming offensive, and often confusing, slogans.

==All of the Calvinists I know personally, all who I am familiar with, and most of them throughout history, are strong in evangelism. So I have no clue where you are coming from with this.

How many mainstream, 5 Point/4 Point, Calvinists do you personally know?

How many mainstream, 5 Point/4 Point, Calvinists have you studied (their writings, biographies, etc)?

I will find your answers to those two questions to be very interesting.

==Evidence?

==Probably.

 

I know there are some Calvinist who do missions and witness. But comparing the Calvinist to the Non-Calvinist is no contest in the field of witnessing and missions.

Sure you can list a few well know names and so could every one else. What about the everyday local church.

My experience has been in a verity of different believing churches, Calvinist included.

The ones that were Calvinist were non-committed to winning the lost and missions. Yes they did their version of it, but it nerve was on the scale or zeal of the Churches I have been in that were not Calvinist.

I thing that is the real issue. Calvinism really does kill missions. It has always killed missions.

Yes, there are a bunch of none Calvinist churches out there that are dead and do nothing.

Those kinds of dead churches are just that dead.

 

Ro 8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

Ro 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Ro 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

1th 1:4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.

2ti 2:10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

Ro 16:13 Salute Rufus elect in the Lord, and his mother and mine.

Re 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and elect, and faithful.

 

==If you are talking about everyday pew warmers than both the Calvinists and the nonCalvinists are in trouble. The average Christian, or church member, does not witness. It does not matter if the church is Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, or Pentecostal. However those who do witness do so because they are obeying the command of Jesus. Many, and I mean many, Calvinists believe and practice this command. If you are not aware of that fact then maybe you should not be trying to debate this issue.

==That is not true, but, I suppose you will believe what you wish. Who am I to stop you?

 

Real , actual history deals a death-blow to G.S's contentions that Calvinism kills missions . John Calvin himself was keenly involved in missions efforts . He personally commisioned a group to go to South America . The RC's were doing their thing down there and Calvin wanted the true gospel expounded . He had a heart for missions . He valued souls and was no "sit-on-your-duff" fatalist .

 

This is simply untrue. Disobedience kills missions. Calvinism does not. Historically, Calvinists have been very committed to evangelism and church planting, both at home and abroad. Many missions movements and church planting efforts have stemmed from Calvinists.

Lack of evangelism is not a Calvinist vs. Arminian issue, but an obedience issue.

 

All believing jews, especially Romans 8-11. Who was 1 & 2 Thessalonians written by and to?...jewish believer(s). Was Rufus jewish? What is taking place in Revelation 17:14? Who is the tribultation for in that passage? (see Romans 11)

 

How do you establish that it is in reference to believing jews?

Believing jews was clearly *not* his audience (he constantly contrasts the jews with the readers - Rom 9 being a prime example) but instead gentile believers. So when he speaks of 'us all' in 8:32,33 and then refers to 'the elect' without shifting to another topic, the only reasonable conclusion is that 'us all' (including gentile believers) is also 'the elect'. Thus, in context, the elect refers to gentile believers.

Rom 11:7 contrast Israel with 'the elect'. If 'the elect' refers simply to jewish believers, then the verse makes no sense...not unless the jewish believers are no longer of Israel. Again, a clear reference to the elect including gentile believers.

It was written to believers, both gentile and jewish.

The audience was the church at Thessalonica: I Th 1:1Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The church included both jews and gentiles: Acts 17:1Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 2And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 3Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. 4And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.

Thus, the audience was both gentile and jewish believers.

Its a greek name, and the audience of Romans was gentile believers. The natural conclusion is that he was a gentile believer. This is really the only debatable verse among the bunch.

They are making war against the Lamb and the Lamb will overcome them. Who is 'with the Lamb' when He overcomes them? Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. Rev 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

The elect of 17:14 are the saints of Rev 19 - ie. a group including gentile believers.

 

What's the difference between a believing Jew and a a believing Gentile?

Galatians 3:26-29 (NKJV)

26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

And the winner is............................................. _______________.

I keep waiting for a voice from Heaven to yell,

HEY! All youse guys! Come out from among them!

Truth is not debateable!!!!

If you persist in debate, you reveal the absence of Truth!!!!

 

The believing gentile is grafted in, the believing jew is already part of the vine.

 

...through your theological bent, yes.

You honestly don't believe Romans 11 is clearly dealing with the jews? That's odd.

Even though the audience was both jew and gentile, the "elect" is clearly the jews. Remember, the jews threw Paul out of Thessalonica.

 

If the believing Jew was already part of the vine, then why did he have to believe in the first place?

Romans 11:23-24 says that believing Jews are also grafted in:

23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

Your distinction between Jew and Gentile is unbiblical. You're telling me that I can't read Romans 8 and apply that to myself since I am a Gentile? Can you give me your secret decoder ring so I know which passages of the NT I should heed and which I can ignore being a Gentile?

 

Andy, salvation is of the jews, there is no getting around that. God sovereignly chose this. They are His people. Those that have not rejected Him are the elect. Those jews have are not. (not all Israel is Israel)
The purpose of Romans 11 is to show this...the reason for the tribulation.l

23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
What does it mean graft them in again? If you figure out the answer to that, you will see it the same as I.

It's not my distinction, but what Scripture says. If you have a problem with that, take it up with Him.

What does 2 Timothy 3:16 say about that? Does it give you a right to use Scripture out of context, though?

It's comments like this that remind me why I limit my conversations with you.

 

Webdog,

Can you show me how I am supposed to ascertain that the "elect" in Romans 8:33 only refers to Jewish believers? The verse is stuck in the middle of an entire chapter that is plainly addressed to all believers.

I agree that salvation has come through the Jews. But that same salvation is through faith (always has been, always will be), so that when salvation was brought forth to Gentiles there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

 

The Calvinist view of predestination and foreknowledge, Regeneration, depravity, particular election, the atonement and , the irresistiblity of Grace. perseverance of the Saints. None of which are ever clearly explained with scripture but, by man's own logic, which is not harmony with scripture.
MB

 

Show me where in romans 8 makes you think verse 33 is speaking about gentiles being elect?
MB

 

It's the absence of truth in Calvinism we argue over. Praise God if debate shows it.
MB

 

Gentiles are not elect by just being a Gentile. Believers are elect, whether Jew or Gentile. This view of the elect only referring to Jews is brand new to me. It probably deserves a new thread. It appears to be a huge stretch that tries to avoid Biblical words that don't fit one's theology. Even non-Cals still refer to all believers as elect - they just disagree with the Cal position on what election entails. Like I said, I've never encountered this line of thinking before.