confused about Calvin (Page 21) Round two

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by Scott J:
It is completely and totally non-sensical to say a person chooses A or B because they have a choice. Either choice will have a reason beyond just simply "having a choice".

Scott, I think we are wasting our time arguing about causes with them. They see that someone chooses and they assume the fact that there was a choice is the cause rather than seeing a cause behind the choice.

John Piper describes how he fought against God's sovereignty at Semitary for a long time and finally it came to a head when he came up to his professor, stuck his pencil in his face and then dropped it on the ground. He then pointed at his professor and said, "See! I dropped it. ME. I chose to do it." He looks back on that now and comments, "As if there couldn't have been other causes (such as, say, God) behind my choosing to do something."

These people will stick their fingers in our faces and say, "See! I did it." The only thing we can do is quote Scripture and let them keep shaking their fingers.

 

[johnp.]

Aren't you being a bit arrogant in that statement? Do you belong to some "elite" group that is better than everybody else? I would say to you:
"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." 1 Cor. 10:12

Not better Linda. Would you have Muslims saved through Mohammad or are you elitist and arrogant, as they might say?

Php 1:6 being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.

1 Cor 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect.

Was Paul also arrogant? Can you not say the same as Paul?

john.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
while i do agree with the fact that the word 'will' is the word 'desire', it also can mean 'be inclined to'. 'Be inclined to' implies that man has free will.

I also have to look at the 'whosoever'. It is from the Greek word 'hostis' which means 'any that'. When one looks at the scriptures that say 'whosoever will' and sees them as 'any that desire' or 'any that are inclined to', one can see free will is definitely mentioned in the Bible.

Again, you assume too much. "Desire" and "Be inclined to" implies only that man has a will, not necessarily a "free will." Free will necessitates that there is nothing that binds our will. All of our choices are free of any obstruction or outside influence. But that is simply not biblical. We are all tainted by sin. Our wills, though we have them, are in bondage to sin. This is what we mean. This is why, although I admit to the will, I deny free will. Adam and Eve had free will. Since the fall, no one born of Adam has free will. Our wills, that we use to make choices (believe, repent, etc.), are in bondage to sin.

You also assume too much with "whosoever" or hostis . First of all, the word "hostis" is not in John 3:16. It is 'ho pisteuon', or "those believing." This entire section of John 3 does not argue for or against free will. It simply says that every one who believes in Him has everlasting life. No one argues that. If you are in the category of "believing" you have everlasting life. The question is "how do you get in that category." That question is not answered in John 3:16, so you can stop using that verse to prove a point it doesn't prove.

 

[Timtoolman]

YOu flatter yourself Cal because not one person has said allyou can do is qoute scripture. Mainly becasue you can't, and you haven't. You have ran from, ignored and mis used scripture. I am tinkled pink that you all have completely ran from the biblical example of total depravity and yet still cling to your man made teaching of total inability.

Let me stick the word of God in your face again. NOt a finger.

Adam and Eve, depraved yet talking with God and understanding His words.

YOu are practicing free will right now, J. Calvin, a man, Or Jesus Christ the Som of God.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Calvibaptist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:
It is completely and totally non-sensical to say a person chooses A or B because they have a choice. Either choice will have a reason beyond just simply "having a choice".

Scott, I think we are wasting our time arguing about causes with them. They see that someone chooses and they assume the fact that there was a choice is the cause rather than seeing a cause behind the choice.
</font>[/QUOTE]Sometimes I feel the same way. But then I think about possible lurkers... if error goes unanswered then it will only spread.

This is especially true of the error of exalting man at the expense of God's sovereignty and grace.

 

[Timtoolman]

If only you had a clue to God's grace. you would not bang on your chest and say isn't God glorious He has chosen me. But you would have a love for souls that would say, why not them. YOu would not strive so hard if you really believed calvinism because nothing I said or anyone else would change one thing. Yet you are a hypocrite in the fact you do not walk the talk. Instead you and jOhnp claim that with untruth we can sway men or change things.
Calvinist are their own worst enemy. The do the oppotsite of what they claim to believe.

They are indeed fakes!

 

[Timtoolman]

And I have no doubt that some are sitting there saying, yes calvinist definition of depravity is unbiblical as timtoolman has pted out through scripture. Depraved man and woman did indeed know God, and understood His word. You theology has been found wanting againa and again.

I have met much greater challenge from men who know the scriptures. Why don't you and JohnP take this junk you are trying to peddle over too sharperiron.com and see how long you last. I hate to muck up a good board with you too but I feel like you will end up someone's fodder.
There are more calvinist over there then non but they do not just throw out any answer no matter how absurd just to have a reply. Real thought and study of God's Word goes into thier answer. I really don'tpost there but I read alot there. There are some great minds on both sides there. Johnp and Scott, you would be run off in a matter of days with your God is the author of sin routine.

 

[johnp.]

Why don't you and JohnP take this junk you are trying to peddle over too sharperiron.com and see how long you last. I hate to muck up a good board with you too but I feel like you will end up someone's fodder.

So you admit to not being able to do it. Cool confession man.

Johnp and Scott, you would be run off in a matter of days with your God is the author of sin routine.

I don't know that Scott has said such a thing but you are on some fishing trip? It is God that assigns my duties not you Tim boy.


Now please answer my questions.

JN 17:9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. [Who does He not pray for?]

JN 17:6 "I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. [Who has He revealed Himself to?]

JN 17:14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. [Who are not part of the world?]


john.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
Johnp and Scott, you would be run off in a matter of days with your God is the author of sin routine.

Tim, I request an apology.

I have not argued in any respect that God is the author of sin. In fact, I recently responded directly to you on this very matter.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
[QB] YOu flatter yourself Cal because not one person has said allyou can do is qoute scripture. Mainly becasue you can't, and you haven't. You have ran from, ignored and mis used scripture.

So, first you say that I can't and haven't quoted Scripture despite the posts I have put in which I have quoted 88 scriptures (I went back and counted them). In two postings I detailed through the entire Bible how the English phrase "whole world" is used and how the word "all" is used. This is at least the beginnings of a word study. In another couple of posts, I detailed the actual Greek meanings of words so we could be more exact with the terms you were throwing around. I then exegeted John 3, John 6, Ephesians 2, and Romans 8:28-30. Then you say that I have ignored and "mis used" Scripture. Either you are not paying attention or you are trying to deliberately mislead others. I hope it is the first.

I am tinkled pink that you all have completely ran from the biblical example of total depravity and yet still cling to your man made teaching of total inability.

Are you admitting that total depravity is taught in the Bible? Hallelujah!

Let me stick the word of God in your face again. NOt a finger.

Adam and Eve, depraved yet talking with God and understanding His words.

This is your biblical example? I've already given my response to this. Don't use a narrative to teach EVERY detail of doctrinal truth. This narrative says absolutely NOTHING about depravity, free will, sovereignty, or eternal salvation, for that matter. I could just as easily argue, because of what I know from the NT, that God must have regenerated Adam and Eve for them to PROPERLY respond to Him. Otherwise, they would have kept running. But I won't argue that now, because my point stands that this narrative says nothing about that. Don't try to make a story say something it doesn't just to prove your point.

YOu are practicing free will right now, J. Calvin, a man, Or Jesus Christ the Som of God.

First of all, I am practicing free will because I have already been regenerated and I have my will freed from bondage to sin. See Romans 6. BTW, that's another Scripture that I have used that you can deny that I've used. I'm not sure what you mean by the end of your sentence. It makes no sense as far as grammar is concerned, let alone any kind of logical point.

[ February 20, 2006, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: Calvibaptist ]

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
[QB] If only you had a clue to God's grace. you would not bang on your chest and say isn't God glorious He has chosen me.

I say it because God said it through Paul:

Ephesians 1:3-6 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.

But you would have a love for souls that would say, why not them.

I do have a love for souls. You have no idea who I am or what I do. I regularly share the gospel with my unsaved friends (three of which are Jewish), who I weep over daily because they are still in their sins. I go on visitation every week. I support missionaries both through my church and individually. And I constantly ask God, "why me and not someone else?" So, don't assume because I believe in the Doctrines of Grace that I don't love the lost.

YOu would not strive so hard if you really believed calvinism because nothing I said or anyone else would change one thing.

I strive so hard because God has ordained not only the ends (His glory through salvation and damnation), but also the ends (you and me arguing and discussing our faith).

Yet you are a hypocrite in the fact you do not walk the talk. Instead you and jOhnp claim that with untruth we can sway men or change things.

Not sure what you mean by this. You don't even know me, so how can you call me a hypocrite? And how can you call 88 Scripture passages untruth?

Calvinist are their own worst enemy. The do the oppotsite of what they claim to believe.

No, we do the opposite of what YOU claim we believe. You obviously have no idea what we believe because you can't seem to present our view without being wrong. I know exactly what you believe because I used to believe it. It is only recently that I came to see the Doctrines of Grace as being biblical truth.

 

[Me4Him]

Originally posted by Scott J:

The question is why do some accept it while others do not?


19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

When or where did I say that men didn't love darkness or choose to reject the gospel? I didn't and you know it since we have been through it repeatedly now.

Having a choice is NEVER the reason for choosing one way or the other. That plainly speaking is an innane assertion by you. It is completely and totally non-sensical to say a person chooses A or B because they have a choice.

Either choice will have a reason beyond just simply "having a choice".

men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

That's the "reason beyond" a simple choice.

You are just continuing to evade knowing that offering a real answer that is biblical will force you to abandon your man glorifying system of belief.

I guess when you're "in the dark", you can't "SEE" anything, scriptural or otherwise.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by Me4Him:
men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

That's the "reason beyond" a simple choice.

You are more right than you know. The biblical definition of total depravity, as described by your favorite person John Calvin, is that because men's deed are evil they love darkness rather than light. You always choose what you desire (love) the most. Men always choose darkness because that's what they love because their deeds (and every thought of the imagination of their hearts according to Genesis 6) is evil. For someone who doesn't believe in total depravity, you certainly argue for it very well here (although nowhere else )

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Me4Him:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:

The question is why do some accept it while others do not?


19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

When or where did I say that men didn't love darkness or choose to reject the gospel? I didn't and you know it since we have been through it repeatedly now.

Having a choice is NEVER the reason for choosing one way or the other. That plainly speaking is an innane assertion by you. It is completely and totally non-sensical to say a person chooses A or B because they have a choice.

Either choice will have a reason beyond just simply "having a choice".

men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

That's the "reason beyond" a simple choice. </font>[/QUOTE] Right. We agree on why they choose not to believe... because their deeds were(are) evil.

You still haven't answered why some DO BELIEVE however.

Are you then arguing that the opposite is what results in belief? Would you then say that some men love light rather than darkness because their deeds were righteous? That is an answer consistent with your system. Not scriptural... but none the less consistent with your insistence upon the autonomy/sovereignty of man in salvation.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
You are just continuing to evade knowing that offering a real answer that is biblical will force you to abandon your man glorifying system of belief.

I guess when you're "in the dark", you can't "SEE" anything, scriptural or otherwise.

</font>[/QUOTE]That would certainly be true... and I continue to pull you out of the closet while you hold the door knob tighter and tighter.

The fact is that I have "SEEN" things scriptural and otherwise. Man is completely and totally guilty. God righteously condemns men because they love darkness rather than light. They do so out of their full free will... and will always do so because it is the nature of the "natural man".

It takes a spiritual man to discern spiritual things... It takes a miracle of God to convert a natural man into a spiritual one.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Calvibaptist:
No, we do the opposite of what YOU claim we believe. You obviously have no idea what we believe because you can't seem to present our view without being wrong. I know exactly what you believe because I used to believe it. It is only recently that I came to see the Doctrines of Grace as being biblical truth.

That seems to be an interesting and persistent theme... calvinists who were once non-calvinists.

A few people here say they used to be calvinists but switched but the ones I have seen were associated with double predestination and over-reacted to that belief by swinging over to the arminian position.

 

[Me4Him]

Originally posted by Calvibaptist:
I also have to look at the 'whosoever'. It is from the Greek word 'hostis' which means 'any that'. When one looks at the scriptures that say 'whosoever will' and sees them as 'any that desire' or 'any that are inclined to', one can see free will is definitely mentioned in the Bible.

Again, you assume too much. "Desire" and "Be inclined to" implies only that man has a will, not necessarily a "free will." Free will necessitates that there is nothing that binds our will. All of our choices are free of any obstruction or outside influence. But that is simply not biblical.

OK, the Natural man receives not the things of God, that explains why God makes a "CALL" to them and in doing so, "ENABLE" them to "make a "CHOICE", "BY FAITH", in spite of the presents of the "natural man".

So how come many are called and few are chosen??

God's "IN-effectual/resistable calling"

or men who love darkness rather than light???

It's right there at the point of "God's calling" and "man's choice" that Calvin is "WRONG",

Calvin said some men's rejection was due to "predestination", rather than their "Choice",

If that's the case, Jesus "DID" come to comdemn some and "DIDN'T" die so the whole world "MIGHT BE SAVED".

And the "BELIEF" of a person has "NO BEARING" upon their "JUDGMENT", it doesn't make any difference if you believe or not believe, you're "predestine".

This totally contradicts all the Bible teaches about our "FAITH" being the reason God Justifies.

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

although I admit to the will, I deny free will. Adam and Eve had free will. Since the fall, no one born of Adam has free will.

Like those who say "lord, Lord" and done all the great works, but still aren't saved???

Did they have a "WILL" to follow God, without God???

If you are in the category of "believing" you have everlasting life. The question is "how do you get in that category." That question is not answered in John 3:16, so you can stop using that verse to prove a point it doesn't prove.

It prove more than you'll ever know following Calvin,

God fulfilled the law in loving the whole world and showing no respect of persons among sinner when He send Jesus not to condemn but that the same "WORLD" he loved "MIGHT BE" saved, and Jesus died for all sins to make that possible because it was the "WILL" of the "FATHER" that none perish.

"WHERE" does "election to damnation" by God fit into this "PLAN OF SALVATION" described above???

 

[Me4Him]

Originally posted by Scott J:

The question is why do some accept it while others do not?


19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

When or where did I say that men didn't love darkness or choose to reject the gospel? I didn't and you know it since we have been through it repeatedly now.

Right. We agree on why they choose not to believe... because their deeds were(are) evil.

You still haven't answered why some DO BELIEVE however.

If they chose not to believe because they "love the world" (darkness) more than God,

then "I ASSUME" they chose to believe because they "Love God" more than the world.

Jos 24:15 choose you this day whom ye will serve;

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

I guess when you're "in the dark", you can't "SEE" anything, scriptural or otherwise.

I continue to pull you out of the closet while you hold the door knob tighter and tighter.

Uh, I hate to tell you this, but "I THINK" you're on the wrong side of the door, I'm not the one in the closet, "YOU ARE", but HEY, when you're "in the dark", it's hard to tell which side you're on.

 

[webdog]

This narrative says absolutely NOTHING about depravity, free will, sovereignty, or eternal salvation, for that matter. I could just as easily argue, because of what I know from the NT, that God must have regenerated Adam and Eve for them to PROPERLY respond to Him.

Tell me if this man was regenerated before he responded to God's Law...

Mat 19:16 Just then someone came up and asked Him, "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?"
Mat 19:17 "Why do you ask Me about what is good?" He said to him. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."
Mat 19:18 "Which ones?" he asked Him. Jesus answered, Do not murder; do not commit adultery; do not steal; do not bear false witness;
Mat 19:19 honor your father and your mother; and love your neighbor as yourself.
Mat 19:20 "I have kept all these," the young man told Him. "What do I still lack?"
Mat 19:21 "If you want to be perfect," Jesus said to him, "go, sell your belongings and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me."
Mat 19:22 When the young man heard that command, he went away grieving , because he had many possessions.

A. He had responded to parts of God's Law
B. Jesus gave him the choice to follow Him
C. He left without doing so

This debunks the "regeneration before response" argument, as it is clear this man was able to respond and he was clearly not regenerated.

 

[Timtoolman]

Here is another whacky view of the world of calvnism.

All men are unable to come to God unless God draws them...irrestiable grace, right?! Yet thier God has to make sure by also hardening thier heart NOw let me see, man totally unable because of sin,can choose nothing else, yet God has to harden thier hearts. What a show.


So very easy!

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Me4Him:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:

The question is why do some accept it while others do not?


19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

When or where did I say that men didn't love darkness or choose to reject the gospel? I didn't and you know it since we have been through it repeatedly now.

Right. We agree on why they choose not to believe... because their deeds were(are) evil.

You still haven't answered why some DO BELIEVE however.

If they chose not to believe because they "love the world" (darkness) more than God,

then "I ASSUME" they chose to believe because they "Love God" more than the world.</font>[/QUOTE] Because they are good, right?

Jos 24:15 choose you this day whom ye will serve;

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

But why would one choose to obey God? It isn't a question as to whether we are called to choose.... it is a question of why would a sinner ever choose light over darkness.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I guess when you're "in the dark", you can't "SEE" anything, scriptural or otherwise.

I continue to pull you out of the closet while you hold the door knob tighter and tighter.

Uh, I hate to tell you this, but "I THINK" you're on the wrong side of the door, I'm not the one in the closet, "YOU ARE", but HEY, when you're "in the dark", it's hard to tell which side you're on.

</font>[/QUOTE]Sounds like a confession to me...