Calvinistic Contradictions

[Scott J]

It is noteworthy that in Wes' short post he misrepresented me then accused me of skewing the truth without ever actually dealing with the substance of my statement.

 

[Wes Outwest]

So it is a "bad" decision?

Accepting Christ is never a bad decision. However the point of decision may be in the worst of situations for the one making the decision to accept Christ.

You didn't demonstrate that anything was skewed. In fact, the inconsistency evident within your own post leaves your response and accusation without merit.

I did not need to demonstrate that anything was skewed, you do it for us.

Either the decision was a good one born of something within the hearer or it was a good one resulting from the Spirit's regeneration of the hearer.

Simply not true. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God...no matter what your condition is when you use what your hear!

If it was a born of something within the hearer then it is partly their goodness that saved them.

I have not said that the hearer has any goodness at all. But every human has the capacity to hear the word of God and to make a decision based on that information. Even the worlds greatest despot has the ability to hear and believe!

There is nothing inconsistent nor dishonest about this contention. Either the decision was caused by man's "good" will or God's. I contend it was God's.

It is clearly stated in scripture that the will of the Father is that none should perish, it is also clearly stated in scripture that we are saved THROUGH FAITH. It should also be obvious that Grace has no power unto itself, it must be SOMEONE who does the saving and not the attribute of the one who does the saving. Therefore we are not saved by grace, we are saved by God who is Gracious toward us.

I don't see non-calvinists as offenders. I see them simply as being wrong about this subject. In varying degrees, they assume part of the glory for their salvation for themselves rather than recognizing it all belongs to God.

OH to the contrary, Scott J, here is what you said

In fact, many here have made it pretty simple. Non-calvinists make charges. Calvinists correct the false charges, explain what Calvinists actually believe.... then the non-calvinists wait awhile and post the same false charges again usually with different phrasing.

Who's making the charges? Who's defending the charges, then who makes the charges again?

It is noteworthy that in Wes' short post he misrepresented me then accused me of skewing the truth without ever actually dealing with the substance of my statement.

This is an example of the typical Calvinist fatalism that continues to feed the fire.

Scott J, I'm more than happy to contend with you concerning matters of faith, but you must first abandon your fatalism, else any conversation will immediately fall into disarray.

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by whetstone:
i don't believe unsaved people have even a rudimentary understanding of the love of Christ until they are converted. This is a 'get on the inside and you'll understand' sort of thing. it is much the same way with Calvinism.

Could not keep away? While I can agree with your first statement about the "love of Christ", I do not about "Calvinism". I think that we from the outside see more about your Calvinistic "ways", and the serious errors that Calvinism promotes in the name of Christianity. Soemthing that you would more than likely be blind to.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />So it is a "bad" decision?

Accepting Christ is never a bad decision. However the point of decision may be in the worst of situations for the one making the decision to accept Christ.</font>[/QUOTE] Of course this illustrates the lack of merit in your response. God brought that person to those circumstances did He not? None the less, it is irrelevant to my point. No matter what situation someone is in they have "good" and "bad" options.

You seem to be contending that in these bad situations someone is making a "good" choice. That makes their salvation dependent on their "good" choice.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />You didn't demonstrate that anything was skewed. In fact, the inconsistency evident within your own post leaves your response and accusation without merit.

I did not need to demonstrate that anything was skewed, you do it for us.</font>[/QUOTE] If that were true, the inconsistencies would be in my arguments rather than yours.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Either the decision was a good one born of something within the hearer or it was a good one resulting from the Spirit's regeneration of the hearer.

Simply not true. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God...no matter what your condition is when you use what your hear! </font>[/QUOTE] Your citation does not refute my point. Who gives us the ability hear? Who gives us the opportunity to hear? What makes one person who listens to the gospel a "hearer" and another a rejector?

Read Romans 8 as a cross reference to the scripture you cited:

28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

HE called. He that has an ear to hear, let him hear... right?

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If it was a born of something within the hearer then it is partly their goodness that saved them.

I have not said that the hearer has any goodness at all.</font>[/QUOTE] Then you agree that the hearer is totally incapable of making any decision that is not ultimately self-centered and selfish? Even men's "good works" have their own glory in mind- not God's. That makes them sinful.

But every human has the capacity to hear the word of God and to make a decision based on that information.

Yes. And left to their own unregenerate will, they will each and every time reject the gospel in favor of worshipping at the altar of SELF.

Even the worlds greatest despot has the ability to hear and believe!

Nope. God has the ability to call and save even the greatest despot. If that despot has approached God in his own abilities then he is still lost.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />There is nothing inconsistent nor dishonest about this contention. Either the decision was caused by man's "good" will or God's. I contend it was God's.

It is clearly stated in scripture that the will of the Father is that none should perish,</font>[/QUOTE] Then you are a universalists? Or perhaps you believe that God's perfect will can be thwarted by men?

If you are neither then there is a good chance that your answer would be similar to mine concerning this scripture. God has made a provision for men showing His willingness to accept those who will believe.

The fact that He chooses to open the eyes of some does not make Him guilty of the spiritual blindness of the rest.

it is also clearly stated in scripture that we are saved THROUGH FAITH.

Yes, by "grace" we are saved through "faith"... and that not of ourselves. What does "that" relate to? The whole preceeding phrase.

It should also be obvious that Grace has no power unto itself, it must be SOMEONE who does the saving and not the attribute of the one who does the saving. Therefore we are not saved by grace, we are saved by God who is Gracious toward us.

Grace is not an attribute. It is an action. It is completely unmeritted favor extended from one to another.

But I agree with your two main points "SOMEONE" does the saving... and that someone is God, not man's in with his "good" choice. And, we are saved by God... by His grace plus nothing from us.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I don't see non-calvinists as offenders. I see them simply as being wrong about this subject. In varying degrees, they assume part of the glory for their salvation for themselves rather than recognizing it all belongs to God.

OH to the contrary, Scott J, here is what you said

In fact, many here have made it pretty simple. Non-calvinists make charges. Calvinists correct the false charges, explain what Calvinists actually believe.... then the non-calvinists wait awhile and post the same false charges again usually with different phrasing.

I am sorry. That is not what I understood you to mean by "offender".

It is noteworthy that in Wes' short post he misrepresented me then accused me of skewing the truth without ever actually dealing with the substance of my statement.

This is an example of the typical Calvinist fatalism that continues to feed the fire. </font>

This was a simple statement of fact.

Scott J, I'm more than happy to contend with you concerning matters of faith, but you must first abandon your fatalism, else any conversation will immediately fall into disarray.

I don't hold to fatalism... or anything like it. Is your point that I must agree with you before I can debate with you? I am sorry that I can't do that.

I argue for what I believe scripture plainly teaches and that's all. I hope that you do as well. Never would I have you change your opinion because I said so. The only reason you should change your opinion is to make it agree more with what God says in His Word... if you show me a way to reconcile all of the factors involved in scriptural salvation better than the the doctrine called calvinism then I am willing to change my beliefs. Until then I will agree with Spurgeon that the doctrine known as calvinism is nothing but the biblical doctrine of grace.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
else any conversation will immediately fall into disarray.

The only reason our conversation would fall into disarray is if we don't stick to the real issues, arguments, and scriptural interpretations but rather persist in taking shots at each other and misportraying what the other believes.

I am more than willing to deal with whatever your objections are to my position. It would be better if we left off with all the extraneous stuff.

 

[Wes Outwest]

Of course this illustrates the lack of merit in your response. God brought that person to those circumstances did He not? None the less, it is irrelevant to my point. No matter what situation someone is in they have "good" and "bad" options.

You seem to be contending that in these bad situations someone is making a "good" choice. That makes their salvation dependent on their "good" choice.

Then I suppose one must establish the definition of good and bad choices and who actually makes them.

The person in the bad situation is not Job. How can you blame the situation a person is in on God? Did God make the situation and put the person in it, or did the person make bad choices that put him in it?

If one believes that man can do nothing as most calvinists do, then God gets the blame for everything good and bad.

If however one believes that God made everything relating to the environment in which he placed man, and that man is free to make his own choices, as I do, then God cannot be blamed for the choices man makes. God does receive the Glory when man chooses to believe in, and be faithful to him. God receives the Glory when the believer tells others of him. God receives the Glory when he judges man for man's bad choices, and God receives the Glory when he rewards the man who made the good choices. Not difficult to understand and quite biblical!

Look at all the times in scripture that man is given a choice. If man does not have the ability to make a choice those scriptures are false! Are you willing to stand by your contention that man does not have that ability?

 

[Wes Outwest]

If that were true, the inconsistencies would be in my arguments rather than yours.

It is in your arguments where I find the inconsistancies. So you are right the fault is in your arguments.

 

[Wes Outwest]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If it was a born of something within the hearer then it is partly their goodness that saved them.

I have not said that the hearer has any goodness at all.</font>[/QUOTE]Then you agree that the hearer is totally incapable of making any decision that is not ultimately self-centered and selfish? Even men's "good works" have their own glory in mind- not God's. That makes them sinful.</font>[/QUOTE]Wrong I do not agree with your convoluted thinging about God's created man! God said our works are to him "filthy rags". He is not interested in our works, he is interested in our faith in Him. It is only those who have faith in Him that he is willing to conform to his Son Jesus. It is illogical to think otherwise! It is illogical to think that man is not capable of performing that which God says that man can do! It is also illogical to thing that God created creatures that are totally dependent upon God for every aspect of life. That line of thinking brings to mind the little boy with a bag of toy soldiers where every move of one of the toy soldiers must be made by the little boy actually picking up the toy and moving it! Is the image you have of man, that of a toy soldier?

 

[Wes Outwest]

Your citation does not refute my point. Who gives us the ability hear? Who gives us the opportunity to hear? What makes one person who listens to the gospel a "hearer" and another a rejector?

When God made man, God gave man the ability to hear. God gave man a brain, memory, senses with which to "hear", and spirit, not holy spirit, but human spirit. "It is spirit that gives life, the flesh has nothing to offer." So God made the first man, and every other man since has the very same "tools" that God put into his created man Adam. God does not "give" man any more nor any less ability than he built in to his created man. Therefore it is False belief to say that God does give man this or that, because he already in making man did that. It is now up to man to use those things that are common to all men.

Read Romans 8 as a cross reference to the scripture you cited:
quote:
28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Read John 17:1-21 to see who Paul is talking about!

HE called. He that has an ear to hear, let him hear... right?

right!

 

[Wes Outwest]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />But every human has the capacity to hear the word of God and to make a decision based on that information.

Yes. And left to their own unregenerate will, they will each and every time reject the gospel in favor of worshipping at the altar of SELF.</font>[/QUOTE]You cannot prove that in the real world! All you have to offer is a scripture that says so! I challenge you prove it with real world statistics!

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Even the worlds greatest despot has the ability to hear and believe!

Nope. God has the ability to call and save even the greatest despot. If that despot has approached God in his own abilities then he is still lost.</font>[/QUOTE]Then you are simply not seeing the truth! God calls every man to Faith in Him, God calls every man to repentance! God has set the banquet table for the feast, but like the friends and neighbors of the Father of the bridegroom, He does not force anyone to come to him. He invites them, if they refuse, he invites others who are not his friends and neighbors, and all who come dressed in proper attire "become invited guests", those who show up improperly dressed are cast out!

So Yes even the greatest despot in the world has been called, and if he responds he is just as saved as the greatest saint in the world.

 

[Wes Outwest]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />There is nothing inconsistent nor dishonest about this contention. Either the decision was caused by man's "good" will or God's. I contend it was God's.

It is clearly stated in scripture that the will of the Father is that none should perish,</font>[/QUOTE]Then you are a universalists? Or perhaps you believe that God's perfect will can be thwarted by men?

If you are neither then there is a good chance that your answer would be similar to mine concerning this scripture. God has made a provision for men showing His willingness to accept those who will believe.

The fact that He chooses to open the eyes of some does not make Him guilty of the spiritual blindness of the rest.</font>[/QUOTE]"Chooses to open the eyes of some"? God chooses to open the eyes of All that is why God made the playing field "level and even" for all man kind! Every man has the same abilities and everyman is given the same call to righteousness. Does every man come? No! You see, I am not a universalist in the sense of man's response to God. I am a universalist in that God's plan of salvation is universally applied to all mankind! Atonement is for the sin of the world, and that is universal. What is not universal is man's response to God! I believe it is God's will that ALL come to him, but it is not in God's plan to force all men to do so! He says, "I place before you life and death, Choose life!" If we do not choose life, that leaves only death! It is our choice!

 

[Wes Outwest]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />it is also clearly stated in scripture that we are saved THROUGH FAITH.

Yes, by "grace" we are saved through "faith"... and that not of ourselves. What does "that" relate to? The whole preceeding phrase.</font>[/QUOTE]You are simply going to have to provide a clear definition of Grace that says it has the power to save man! Please do so!

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />It should also be obvious that Grace has no power unto itself, it must be SOMEONE who does the saving and not the attribute of the one who does the saving. Therefore we are not saved by grace, we are saved by God who is Gracious toward us.

Grace is not an attribute. It is an action. It is completely unmeritted favor extended from one to another.

But I agree with your two main points "SOMEONE" does the saving... and that someone is God, not man's in with his "good" choice. And, we are saved by God... by His grace plus nothing from us.</font>[/QUOTE]Again You are going to have to provide a clear definition of Grace that says it is something other than an attribute of the one possessing it. Attribute is defined as that which is true of the one possessing it.

Since when is grace an action?
Since when is someone's favor of another an action?
I suggest you spend some time with webster's and learn the true meanings of words!

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />But every human has the capacity to hear the word of God and to make a decision based on that information.

Yes. And left to their own unregenerate will, they will each and every time reject the gospel in favor of worshipping at the altar of SELF.</font>[/QUOTE]You cannot prove that in the real world! All you have to offer is a scripture that says so! I challenge you prove it with real world statistics!</font>[/QUOTE] Are you serious? You would accept the authority of man's ability to measure things statistically over the authority of what God said?

Jer 17:9"The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it?

10 I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings.

God knows man's heart. What He says about it is far more reliable than any statistic.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Even the worlds greatest despot has the ability to hear and believe!

Nope. God has the ability to call and save even the greatest despot. If that despot has approached God in his own abilities then he is still lost.</font>[/QUOTE]Then you are simply not seeing the truth! God calls every man to Faith in Him, God calls every man to repentance!</font>[/QUOTE] Re-read Romans 8. Calvinists believe there is a general call in which God reveals Himself by scripture and nature to the extent that no one is excused. (Romans 1)

If God calls "every man" then the only way you can reasonably deal with Romans 8 is to be a universalist. I quoted this text and it clearly says that those that God call, He justifies.

God has set the banquet table for the feast, but like the friends and neighbors of the Father of the bridegroom, He does not force anyone to come to him.

I, as a person who accepts that calvinistic framework, do not believe that God forces anyone.

He changes their nature. When He does their will is to follow Him. A dead spirit will not respond, a quickened one will.

He invites them, if they refuse,

These are lost.

he invites others who are not his friends and neighbors, and all who come dressed in proper attire "become invited guests",

These are the elect.

those who show up improperly dressed are cast out!

These are those who think they can approach God in their own righteousness... ie. by their own "good" choices.

So Yes even the greatest despot in the world has been called, and if he responds he is just as saved as the greatest saint in the world.

You must be born of the Spirit.

Why did Jesus use the analogy of birth? Does anyone choose to be born? Is it ever a violation of a child's will to be born? The child's will isn't operative is it? All of the willful decisions pertaining to his birth were made by another. The child is just behaving according to the nature he inherited.

 

[Wes Outwest]

The only reason you should change your opinion is to make it agree more with what God says in His Word... if you show me a way to reconcile all of the factors involved in scriptural salvation better than the the doctrine called calvinism then I am willing to change my beliefs. Until then I will agree with Spurgeon that the doctrine known as calvinism is nothing but the biblical doctrine of grace.

If you abandon your LITERALIST approach to the scriptures, read the stories in the bible for what they are, take the meaning from the story and not just one sentence or phrase of the story, Learn the principle in each of the stories and each of the parables of Jesus, learn the principles that Paul, Peter, Jude, the author of Hebrews, and James as well as the big four, are teaching and you will see that the "doctrines of grace" that you adhere to now are mythology! Man made beliefs!

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The only reason you should change your opinion is to make it agree more with what God says in His Word... if you show me a way to reconcile all of the factors involved in scriptural salvation better than the the doctrine called calvinism then I am willing to change my beliefs. Until then I will agree with Spurgeon that the doctrine known as calvinism is nothing but the biblical doctrine of grace.

If you abandon your LITERALIST approach to the scriptures,</font>[/QUOTE] I attempt to read scripture in its normative sense. Where the Bible gives no indication that it is to be taken as literal then I accept it as literal.

read the stories in the bible for what they are,

I believe I do. However, that has little to do with this topic or most of the scriptures we've mentioned. These scriptures are statements of fact for the most part.

Jesus use of new birth is figurative but if you introduce human will as the critical element then the analogy makes no sense at all. Nicodemus even asked Christ if a man could enter into his mother's womb a second time.

take the meaning from the story and not just one sentence or phrase of the story,

Prove that I am not doing this. My contention and experience is that the more you read scripture in context and allow it to say what it says, the more the system known as calvinism becomes self apparent.

The context of John 3 is Nicodemus night meeting with Christ to learn about the gospel. Jesus chose birth to illustrate salvation- not me.

Learn the principle in each of the stories and each of the parables of Jesus, learn the principles that Paul, Peter, Jude, the author of Hebrews, and James as well as the big four, are teaching and you will see that the "doctrines of grace" that you adhere to now are mythology! Man made beliefs!

So now since I don't agree with you, you assume that I am ignorant? I have done what you suggest. Rather than finding the doctrines of grace mythology, it has been the only framework that can consistently account for all of scriptures teachings and that can allow the tensions within scripture to exist without denying any biblical truth.

Wes, Rather than this type of non-sense, if you really think I am wrong then show me how rather than just telling me repeatedly that I am wrong and you are right.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />it is also clearly stated in scripture that we are saved THROUGH FAITH.

Yes, by "grace" we are saved through "faith"... and that not of ourselves. What does "that" relate to? The whole preceeding phrase.</font>[/QUOTE]You are simply going to have to provide a clear definition of Grace that says it has the power to save man! Please do so!</font>[/QUOTE] First off, you preach to me about context then rip this statement out of the context in which I clearly said that God saves.

Second, here is the relevant definition for grace:

good will, loving-kindness, favour
of the merciful kindness by which God, exerting his holy influence upon souls, turns them to Christ, keeps, strengthens, increases them in Christian faith, knowledge, affection, and kindles them to the exercise of the Christian virtues

From Baker's dictionary:

The word "grace" in biblical parlance can, like forgiveness, repentance, regeneration, and salvation, mean something as broad as describing the whole of God's activity toward man or as narrow as describing one segment of that activity. An accurate, common definition describes grace as the unmerited favor of God toward man. In the Old Testament, the term that most often is translated "grace, " is hen [ej]; in the New Testament, it is charis [cavri"].

Again You are going to have to provide a clear definition of Grace that says it is something other than an attribute of the one possessing it. Attribute is defined as that which is true of the one possessing it.

Done. Now your turn.

Please show a source for the definition you suggest and then a proof that it relates to Ephesians 2:8 or any of the other scriptures relevant to this conversation.

Since when is grace an action?

Since always... but perfectly illustrated when God gave His Son to provide salvation to us who were wholly and completely unworthy of such a gift.

Since when is someone's favor of another an action?

At what point can someone's favor of another be real if not associated with action?

I suggest you spend some time with webster's and learn the true meanings of words!

I am aware of the definitions of grace including the one that applies to the context of the scriptures relating to "the gift of God".

As for your second insenuation that I am ignorant- one isn't ignorant nor stupid simply because they disagree with you. You don't win any points nor contribute to a fruitful discussion by attempting to make degrading generalizations.

I don't believe what I believe because I haven't researched the issue or learned the meaning of the terms but rather I believe it because I have done these things. You may not agree with my conclusions but you don't have the knowledge of me to make the assumptions you have.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Wes, Outwest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />There is nothing inconsistent nor dishonest about this contention. Either the decision was caused by man's "good" will or God's. I contend it was God's.

It is clearly stated in scripture that the will of the Father is that none should perish,</font>[/QUOTE]Then you are a universalists? Or perhaps you believe that God's perfect will can be thwarted by men?

If you are neither then there is a good chance that your answer would be similar to mine concerning this scripture. God has made a provision for men showing His willingness to accept those who will believe.

The fact that He chooses to open the eyes of some does not make Him guilty of the spiritual blindness of the rest.</font>[/QUOTE]"Chooses to open the eyes of some"?</font>[/QUOTE] Yes. Just like Jesus didn't heal every physically blind man in His time on earth nor did He provide equal access to all blind people.

God chooses to open the eyes of All that is why God made the playing field "level and even" for all man kind!

Show the scripture that supports this view. Show from history that this view holds water. In fact, give any logical, supported proof for this contention.

A simple disproof is that people have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel of Christ. How does that fit with your judgment that the field must line up with your opinion of what is "level and even"?

The insenuation seems to be that if everyone doesn't get an equal shot that God hasn't been fair. However the truth is that God would be fair if He extended grace to no sinner. It is completely "unfair" that Jesus Christ had to die to win our pardon.

The field is not "level and even" but not because God hasn't been fair with the lost... but because he has been "unfair" in the favor of the saved.

Every man has the same abilities and everyman is given the same call to righteousness. Does every man come? No!

I agree. The only ones who come are those who the Spirit gives a new nature to... an ear to hear.

Atonement is for the sin of the world, and that is universal.

If the atonement is for the sin of the world, why aren't all sins covered and all men saved?

What is not universal is man's response to God!

Correct. Christ's blood is sufficient for any and all sin. It is efficient for the sins of the elect.

I believe it is God's will that ALL come to him, but it is not in God's plan to force all men to do so!

You didn't answer my question. If it is God's perfect will that all men come to Him then why don't they?

I didn't say that God forced anyone to come to Him. In fact, I don't believe this and am not sure I have seen a calvinist who does.

Like I mentioned, it is not a violation of one's will to be born. It comes naturally.

It is not within the nature of a dead man to breath. A living man will breath, not because he is forced to nor because he chooses to of his free will. He breaths because it is in his nature to do so.

He says, "I place before you life and death, Choose life!" If we do not choose life, that leaves only death! It is our choice!

You have taken this citation out of context haven't you?

None the less, as Pastor Larry and others have said, calvinists believe that man is responsible before God. There is nothing for us to disagree with in that passage.

 

[Wes Outwest]

Are you serious? You would accept the authority of man's ability to measure things statistically over the authority of what God said?

Jer 17:9"The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it?

10 I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings.

God knows man's heart. What He says about it is far more reliable than any statistic.

If what you say about man is true, then it must be prove-able with statistics. You must also have a standard by which you measure the truth.

By the way I know and accept those scriptures too! Did you notice what God said he does about man's heart? Did you notice that God gives to man according to MAN's ways! That right there dispels one of your doctrines of Grace! If man is bad as you say all men are Totally Depraved, just what good could can come to man according to his depravity? None whatever, yet we see that God has not necessarily given bad to all man kind. He has indeed not meted out the justice that man's sins merit. God is being good to man so that man will indeed seek after him.

How many unbelievers do you know who continually seek to be bad?

Let's see some real, confirmable, statistics if man is so bad!

Now don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that man can become as GOD! Or that man is Angelic, or above sinning, or any other idea like that. I am simply refuting Total Depravity!

 

[Wes Outwest]

If God calls "every man" then the only way you can reasonably deal with Romans 8 is to be a universalist. I quoted this text and it clearly says that those that God call, He justifies.

And I told you to read John 17 to find out who Paul is talking about! You didn't because you know it would refute your doctrine!

 

[Scott J]

If what you say about man is true, then it must be prove-able with statistics.

I love statistics. They tell us alot of valuable things. But they are absolutely worthless to measure the deepest intents of a person's heart or their most basic motives.

You must also have a standard by which you measure the truth.

That is why I said the Bible trumps man's ability to measure statistically.

The only reliable standard for salvation or the spiritual nature of men is the Bible.