Calvinists

[JonC]

This is disingenuous …

“No one can come to Me [TOTAL INABILITY] unless the Father who sent Me [UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION] draws him [IRRESISTIBLE GRACE]; and I will raise him up on the last day [PRESERVATION OF SAINTS].” - John 6:44

… disagree with and reject my exegesis to your hearts content and with my blessings (convincing human hearts of TRUTH is a job for the Holy Spirit and far above my pay grade), however to claim that my embracing of TULIP is not “burdened by God’s Word” is balderdash.

It is not disingenuous.

You created a strawman argument.

I never once stated that men can come to Christ without the Father drawing him.

(A strawman argument is a deliberate attempt to mislead and distract from the issue at hand by attacking a position that isn't actually being debated.)

That belief (that the only way man can come to Christ is by being drawn by the Father) is shared by all Christian theologies.

You acting as of my comment (which you even quoted) is saying otherwise is not only disingenuous but dishonest.

 

[JonC]

This is typically what happens in these discussions (in asking Calvinists to defend their faith by what is written in God's Word).

We ask for passages.
They give us writings from men they agree with.
We point that out and ask again
They give us writings from men they agree with
We ask again for Scripture
They tell us what they believe
We again ask for Scripture
They pick a verse comon to all Christian theologies as if we objected (they engage in strawman arguments)

I think the purpose of Calvinists here is to simply flood the thread with nonsense until it finally is closed.

Bottom line -

Calvinism is not in the Bible
It is what a minority of believers think is taught by the Bible
It can only pass the test of examining what men think is taught by the Bible against what they believe the Bible teavhes.
It will ALWAYS fail the test of Scripture.

But many will choose to follow its teachings.
For some, they will hold it but refuse to lean on their understanding, but holding it is a cheap substitute for the truths Calvinism replaces.
For others, they will be carried away from the faith.

 

[Zaatar71]

This is typically what happens in these discussions (in asking Calvinists to defend their faith by what is written in God's Word).

We ask for passages.
They give us writings from men they agree with.
We point that out and ask again
They give us writings from men they agree with
We ask again for Scripture
They tell us what they believe
We again ask for Scripture
They pick a verse comon to all Christian theologies as if we objected (they engage in strawman arguments)

I think the purpose of Calvinists here is to simply flood the thread with nonsense until it finally is closed.

Bottom line -

Calvinism is not in the Bible
It is what a minority of believers think is taught by the Bible
It can only pass the test of examining what men think is taught by the Bible against what they believe the Bible teavhes.
It will ALWAYS fail the test of Scripture.

But many will choose to follow its teachings.
For some, they will hold it but refuse to lean on their understanding, but holding it is a cheap substitute for the truths Calvinism replaces.
For others, they will be carried away from the faith.

This is curious because not long ago in a thread where Professor Murray listed more than 54 scriptures, you were asked to comment on any of them, and virtually every post you made did not engage in the scripture offered, instead you kept repeating your own understanding, rather than scripture. It looks as if you did the very thing you suggest Calvinists did?? Strangely enough. Go figure!

In this thread alone, you posted 14 times with no scripture from you/

 

[Martin Marprelate]

This is curious because not long ago in a thread where Professor Murray listed more than 54 scriptures, you were asked to comment on any of them, and virtually every post you made did not engage in the scripture offered, instead you kept repeating your own understanding, rather than scripture. It looks as if you did the very thing you suggest Calvinists did?? Strangely enough. Go figure!

In this thread alone, you posted 14 times with no scripture from you/

This is true. One of te most dispiriting things on this forum is to see page after page of men's opinions without a scripture to back them up.
I'm finished again on this board - for the time being at least - but if the mods wanted to do something constructive they could delete posts when people post three times without citing Scripture. This will not happen however, because if it did one moderator would find a third of his posts deleted (which would be no bad thing!). 'Stay away from a foolish man, for you will not find knowledge on his lips' (Proverbs 14:7).

 

[JonC]

One of te most dispiriting things on this forum is to see page after page of men's opinions without a scripture to back them up.

I absolutely agree with this post - well stated.
I am surprised as you typically leave when people ask for actual Scripture.

BUT that is the problem many of us have been pointing out.

How many times have I asked members here to back up the idea that Jesus suffered God's wrath with Scripture only to be met with verses saying no such thing or pages of quotes from men who believe that to be true????

I have asked Calvinists for over a decade to provide passages from God's Word stating their belief.
This (the gospel, the Atonement) is too impirtant a doctrine to leave up to men telling people what they think the Bible teaches when each of us have the Word of God at our fingertips

But for all the asking what do we get? Owen. Murray. Knox. Gill. And passages after passages that do not come anywhere close to stating their belief.


Here is what I believe - and yes, I can and will provide Scrioture that state my belief if asked:

Just as through the disobedience of one man, Adam the many were made sinners , so also through the obedience of the one man, Christ, the many will be made righteous (Rom 5:18-19).

The wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23), for sin produces death (James 1:15). Death spread to all because all have sinned (Romans 5:12). It is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment. (Heb 9:27). I believe that God became man (truly man) like us but without sin (Heb 4:15). He bore our sins bodily on the cross (1 Peter 2:24).
God became one of us (Heb 2:11-13) so that we would become like Him (Jn 15:4; Gal 2:20; 2 Cor 3:18) and share in His glory (Rom 8:17).

The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is life in Christ Jesus (Rom 6:23). The second statement (the gift of God) does not nullify the first (the wages of sin), because sin produces death (James 1:15). But it does remove the sting of death (1 Cor 15:55) because although we die yet shall we live (John 11:25).

 

[cjab]

This is disingenuous …

“No one can come to Me [TOTAL INABILITY] unless the Father who sent Me [UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION] draws him [IRRESISTIBLE GRACE]; and I will raise him up on the last day [PRESERVATION OF SAINTS].” - John 6:44

… disagree with and reject my exegesis to your hearts content and with my blessings (convincing human hearts of TRUTH is a job for the Holy Spirit and far above my pay grade), however to claim that my embracing of TULIP is not “burdened by God’s Word” is balderdash.

Yours is a human interpretation with a Calvinist slant, in the sense that it is rooting Christ's words as applying to God's design and supervening purposes before the foundation of the world, whereas the more natural context to John 6:44 is the temporal God<->human dynamic in the here and now.

It's most unclear why the Calvinist insists on interpreting John 6:44 as you do.

Consider: Israelite prophecy and teaching is not, in general or at all, given to expouding double-predestination, but rather given to describing temporal events, sins and God's current relationship with the Israelites, and calls by God to repentance. One could question whether Jesus ever had your view in mind. So,

“No one can come to Me [i.e. now, this very moment] unless the Father who sent Me [election is predicated on man's willingness to respond to God, viz. Psalm 40:6-8 and Hebrews 10:5-7] draws him [God's grace is accepted - as opposed to it being rejected due to unrepentant sin & hardening the heart]; and I will raise him up on the last day [the saints remain in God's grace].” - John 6:44.

Here is Ellicott's commentary on John 6:44 "No man can come to me.—The subject is still the mystery of the varying effects of His revelation on the minds of men. These depend upon their present mental state, which is itself the result of acceptance of, or rejection of, divine influence. The Father which sent Him had, by law, and prophets, and worship, been preparing them. The history of each individual life had been a succession, in every conscious hour, of influences for good or for evil. The mind stood between these, and willed for one or other. He who day by day, with all his light and strength, however little that all might have been, had sought the pure, and true, and good—had sought really to know God—was drawn of God, and he only it was who could now come to Him whom God sent. Others were drawn of evil, because they had submitted themselves to its power. They had chosen darkness, and could not now see the light; they had bound themselves in the silken cords of sin, which had hardened into fetters of iron; they had lost themselves in the labyrinths of what they thought wisdom, and did not recognise the true and living way which was opened for them."

 

[cjab]

Whatever. You are free to do whatever you want. No one cares about such things.

That's right. No-one cares. Even "The Bolsec Controversy on Predestination, From 1551 to 1555: The Statements of Jerome Bolsec, and the Responses of John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and Other Reformed Theologians. Edited by Philip C. Holtrop. 2 vols. Lewiston, N.Y: Edwin Mellen Press, 1993. $199.95" is dismissed by Calvinists as "one simply cannot trust it." As if one could trust Calvin? No, one cannot trust him.

Calvinism promotes itself as a "supremacist theology." In this respect, it a dangerous theology, because it is factional and fanatical. The promoters of factions within the church were severely rebuked by the apostles, and yet Calvinists revel in their factionalism and fanaticism.

That's not really to make any comment on Calvin himself, who whilst he lived was just one reformer amongst many others. As with so many commentators, they are human, and they err because they are fallible. Calvin was no exception in this, and there is no doubt he erred on many occasions, in life and in theology. Even his protestant peers disagreed with him at times. His proper role today is essentially as a bible commentator. One can agree with what he says, or one can disagree with it - as with any other bible commentator.

But anyone who promote "Calvinism" for its own sake is surely misguided.

 

[Reynolds]

BYW....there is a reason Calvinists often flock to echo chambers. There they can compare their faith against John Knox, John Murray, John Owen, etc. without having to be burdened by God's Word.

Truth is that Calvinism, Arminianism, nor any soteriological theory I know harmonize perfectly with every passage in Scripture.

 

[atpollard]

It's most unclear why the Calvinist insists on interpreting John 6:44 as you do.

In John 6:44-45, have you ever pondered why it keeps stating terms like “all” and “no one” and “everyone” if it is “man’s choice” that makes the difference?

Most that argue over these verses prefer to focus on the “no one can” opening phrase, but I was always more fascinated by the fact that EVERY person drawn (without exception) will be raised on the last day and every person taught by the Father (without exception) will come to the son. The 100% nature of the thing seems significant.

It is most unclear to me why so many anti-Calvinists (since most go far beyond simply disagreeing to visceral hatred of TULIP) insist on ignoring these clues in John 6:44-45.

 

[atpollard]

You created a strawman argument.

I never once stated that men can come to Christ without the Father drawing him.

That was not my argument.

Four of the five “Doctrines of Grace” (TU*IP) were found in some form in just that one verse, and yet YOU claimed Calvinists discuss their faith …

without having to be burdened by God's Word.

… clearly implying that TULIP was extra-Biblical. So, I presented “God’s Word” in support of TULIP. YOU may consider TULIP found in God’s Word to be a “strawman” response to your accusation, but I considered it a direct and relevant refutation of your defamatory claim against the Doctrines of Grace that I hold FROM reading scripture (I have never been a member of a Reformed Church or read any of Calvin’s writings).

 

[Zaatar71]

This is typically what happens in these discussions (in asking Calvinists to defend their faith by what is written in God's Word).

Every Calvinist on here offered you scripture, that you did not grasp the meaning.

We ask for passages.
They give us writings from men they agree with.

The links offered contain mass amounts of scripture, which you attempt to dismiss because Godly men, professors, Pastors with 50 years of pastoral ministry offer, but you go with your own understanding, which is your right to believe or not believe scriptures offered, but do not say the verses were not offered!

We point that out and ask again
They give us writings from men they agree with

Trained Godly men offering all relevant scriptures which you deny, then claimed they were not offered?

We ask again for Scripture
They tell us what they believe

What we believe, based on scripture. You are like the poster Silverhair. No matter what is presented, you deny it, and deny it was offered to you!

We again ask for Scripture
They pick a verse comon to all Christian theologies as if we objected (they engage in strawman arguments)

You do this in about 90% of your posts! We see it daily, we read you doing it. Your posts are not invisible.

I think the purpose of Calvinists here is to simply flood the thread with nonsense until it finally is closed.

you now reveal your secret, on what you do offering post after post with no scripture. It looks like you repeat yourself non-stop.

Bottom line -

Calvinism is not in the Bible

It is everywhere in the bible,lol

It is what a minority of believers think is taught by the Bible

I would say the majority of believers understand it is truth.

It can only pass the test of examining what men think is taught by the Bible against what they believe the Bible teavhes.

it is quite acceptable to look at what the Church has believed to make sure we do not just lean on our own understanding.

It will ALWAYS fail the test of Scripture.

It actually is confirmed by scripture, despite your denial of those scriptures

But many will choose to follow its teachings

Once believers see and hear the truth expounded, The Spirit allows actual believers to embrace these truths. Even those who resist at first, come to understand over time.

.
For some, they will hold it but refuse to lean on their understanding, but holding it is a cheap substitute for the truths Calvinism replaces.

Sorry you are unable, and unwilling to welcome truth here. perhaps another time will work out better for you, if God allows it.

For others, they will be carried away from the faith.

You have made statements that you thought you believed truth but now have moved awy from those truths which you now deny. We cannot judge your heart, but we read what you post sometimes.a

 

[Silverhair]

Truth is that Calvinism, Arminianism, nor any soteriological theory I know harmonize perfectly with every passage in Scripture.

And that is why we trust the word of God and not some man-made philosophy.

 

[JonC]

That was not my argument.

Four of the five “Doctrines of Grace” (TU*IP) were found in some form in just that one verse, and yet YOU claimed Calvinists discuss their faith …

… clearly implying that TULIP was extra-Biblical. So, I presented “God’s Word” in support of TULIP. YOU may consider TULIP found in God’s Word to be a “strawman” response to your accusation, but I considered it a direct and relevant refutation of your defamatory claim against the Doctrines of Grace that I hold FROM reading scripture (I have never been a member of a Reformed Church or read any of Calvin’s writings).

The "L" is not found in Scripture. Saying otherwise is not honest because it is reading into the biblical text what is not there.

Arminianism, for example, typically holds that the Father draws all men to Christ (often quoting Jn 12:32). They, however, believe thar men can still choose disobedience.

Limited Atonement is also not based on God's drawing.

The "L" (Limited Atonement") is the Second Head of the "Doctrines of Grace". It is based not on Scripture but reasoning that Atonement is limited due to divine sovereignty.

"For it was the entirely free plan and very gracious will and intention of God the Father that the enlivening and saving effectiveness of his Son’s costly death should work itself out in all the elect, in order that God might grant justifying faith to them only and thereby lead them without fail to salvation."

So yes, Calvinism DOES use Scripture. But Calvinism itself is not in the Bible.

 

[JonC]

Truth is that Calvinism, Arminianism, nor any soteriological theory I know harmonize perfectly with every passage in Scripture.

There are some that do, but they are less detailed and insistent on knowing the mind of God. Snd among these there are differences in fo us, and sometimes in interpretation. But they are actually biblical (they harmonize with Scripture because they actually come from what is written in Scripture).

Truth, however, is we should continually strive to reform our soteriology until it DOES harmonize with Scripture.


Why would anybody want to remain a Calvinist, or Arminian, of they knew their beluef did not harmonizers perfectly with Scripture?

I mean, they know it is wrong but they hold it anyway?

 

[JonC]

And that is why we trust the word of God and not some man-made philosophy.

I think @Reynolds has a good point as well.

Calvinists have to know at some level (if not already carried away by their philosophy) that their theory is wrong. They know it does not harmonize with Scripture.

BUT they fight tooth and nail in resisting changing their faith so that it does harmonize with God's Word.


I cannot help but believe there comes a point when the Calvinist who actually tests his faith makes an active choice to reject God's Word in favor of human philosophy.

I cannot see how it can be otherwise. We have God's Word. We have Calvinism. And one of these things is NOT luke the other, so a choice has to be made.

 

[Silverhair]

In John 6:44-45, have you ever pondered why it keeps stating terms like “all” and “no one” and “everyone” if it is “man’s choice” that makes the difference?

Most that argue over these verses prefer to focus on the “no one can” opening phrase, but I was always more fascinated by the fact that EVERY person drawn (without exception) will be raised on the last day and every person taught by the Father (without exception) will come to the son. The 100% nature of the thing seems significant.

It is most unclear to me why so many anti-Calvinists (since most go far beyond simply disagreeing to visceral hatred of TULIP) insist on ignoring these clues in John 6:44-45.

But you continue to ignore what Christ said: "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." Joh 12:32

If as you are teaching @atpollard that everyone drawn will be raised up then you are teaching universalism.

But that is not what we see in scripture is it?

So while all are drawn it is only those that have heard and learned that will be raised up. We see this clearly here "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise," Eph 1:13

All of us that are biblical will disagree with the calvinist view because it is not found in scripture.

 

[Zaatar71]

In John 6:44-45, have you ever pondered why it keeps stating terms like “all” and “no one” and “everyone” if it is “man’s choice” that makes the difference?

Most that argue over these verses prefer to focus on the “no one can” opening phrase, but I was always more fascinated by the fact that EVERY person drawn (without exception) will be raised on the last day and every person taught by the Father (without exception) will come to the son. The 100% nature of the thing seems significant.

It is most unclear to me why so many anti-Calvinists (since most go far beyond simply disagreeing to visceral hatred of TULIP) insist on ignoring these clues in John 6:44-45.

Yes, atpollard your first sentence destroys the ideas of these three men who deny straight up what scripture declares as if it is not what Is Written
Yes, you then mention the effectual call that Christians delight in.
Yes, it is ponderous why they express a hate for God, His word, and His people

 

[Zaatar71]

That's right. No-one cares. Even "The Bolsec Controversy on Predestination, From 1551 to 1555: The Statements of Jerome Bolsec, and the Responses of John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and Other Reformed Theologians. Edited by Philip C. Holtrop. 2 vols. Lewiston, N.Y: Edwin Mellen Press, 1993. $199.95" is dismissed by Calvinists as "one simply cannot trust it." As if one could trust Calvin? No, one cannot trust him.

Calvinism promotes itself as a "supremacist theology." In this respect, it a dangerous theology, because it is factional and fanatical. The promoters of factions within the church were severely rebuked by the apostles, and yet Calvinists revel in their factionalism and fanaticism.

That's not really to make any comment on Calvin himself, who whilst he lived was just one reformer amongst many others. As with so many commentators, they are human, and they err because they are fallible. Calvin was no exception in this, and there is no doubt he erred on many occasions, in life and in theology. Even his protestant peers disagreed with him at times. His proper role today is essentially as a bible commentator. One can agree with what he says, or one can disagree with it - as with any other bible commentator.

But anyone who promote "Calvinism" for its own sake is surely misguided.

No one has quoted Calvin here.

 

[Zaatar71]

But you continue to ignore what Christ said: "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." Joh 12:32

here Silverhair does not believe Jn,6 and tries to sneak over to Jn 12, as if that different context will somehow make Jn 6 disappear,lol

If as you are teaching @atpollard that everyone drawn will be raised up then you are teaching universalism.

Silverhair is consistent in not understanding the verses he tries to quote.

But that is not what we see in scripture is it?

We are puzzled by hwat you think you see.

So while all are drawn it is only those that have heard and learned that will be raised up. We see this clearly here "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise," Eph 1:13

Yes read the verses backward, and out of context, and expect it will end well?,not happening

You have to talk yourself into your own idea...not healthy.

 

[Silverhair]

here Silverhair does not believe Jn,6 and tries to sneak over to Jn 12, as if that different context will somehow make Jn 6 disappear,lol

Who are the the all that Christ draws Z? Are they different from those the Father draws?

Silverhair is consistent in not understanding the verses he tries to quote.

Show me where I did not understand the verses Z. You make these comments but do not provide any proof.

Yes read the verses backward, and out of context, and expect it will end well?,not happening

Show me where Z.


Joh 6:45 "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

So while all are drawn it is only those that have heard and learned that will be raised up. We see this clearly here "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise," Eph 1:13

Not backwards and not out of context.

That is why I am a bible believer and not a calvinist.