Defending the truth against the primary so called "proof texts" against Calvinism

[Iconoclast]

Skandelon, did you want an answer or an excuse to argue?

I gave you a reasoned answer. You offered no answer, just more argument.

What's your answer, and if you have one, why did you post a question -- oh, except to start another argument.

I'm starting to see a pattern here... It all wraps around "start an argument" and we could add, "with a Calvinist." :wavey:

Asthe Scriptures say:

Prov 26:21 [As] coals [are] to burning coals, and wood to fire; so [is] a contentious man to kindle strife.

1Cor 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Well said gl, no answer comes back....because when there is no real answer to truth it is hard to try and invent one.Lame attemps get exposed by the truth.

 

[Skandelon]

.because when there is no real answer to truth it is hard to try and invent one.Lame attemps get exposed by the truth.

We agree on that point and I think one reading back through this thread can clearly see who it was making "lame attempts" that were exposed. :thumbsup:

 

[MB]

I'm sorry, but the Bible is very clear that we were chosen before the foundation of the world. "even as he chose us(us, not Christ) in him(Christ) before the foundation of the world(when the verb happened which was 'chose'" We don't have to exist yet for God to choose us.

We do if we are chosen in Him, just as scripture says.

It isn't us that are chosen here but the future of those who get saved. You can't be chosen here because you are not in Christ. You hadn't even been thought of yet. What was chosen before the foundation of the world is "that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:", once we are saved.

There simply is no election here at all as described by Calvinist. Especially a particular election.
MB

 

[Havensdad]

We agree on that point and I think one reading back through this thread can clearly see who it was making "lame attempts" that were exposed. :thumbsup:

Yep. And hes right up there... ^

:laugh:

 

[Havensdad]

We do if we are chosen in Him, just as scripture says.

It isn't us that are chosen here but the future of those who get saved. You can't be chosen here because you are not in Christ. You hadn't even been thought of yet. What was chosen before the foundation of the world is "that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:", once we are saved.

There simply is no election here at all as described by Calvinist. Especially a particular election.
MB

Did you just apply the word "yet" to God? Are you an open theist?

You are completely misrepresenting that verse. The word "in" is simply denoting instrumentality in regards to how we were brought near to God (i.e. through the Blood of Christ), or perhaps "with".

In either case, it is saying that were chosen, not "choosing." Try again.

 

[Skandelon]

To make it easier, just answer these questions:

So if men are born with an "innate correct understanding of God," as you have just indicated, why do you suppose "nothing in a sinner is acceptable or pleasing to God" from birth? (as the doctrine of total depravity teaches)

Would not a child's "correct understanding of God," prior to its being marred by sinful man, be "pleasing" or "acceptable?" And what leads you to believe that such understanding couldn't lead to simple child like faith in God as is often experienced in children of believers?

Can anyone answer these?

 

[MB]

MB,
you said;



you say this-To say we are chosen before the foundation of the world is rather ignorant since we did not exist before the foundation of the world. We certainly could not have been "In Him" other wise we would have been born saved.
Then you say the very same statement;

This is what I said;
This verse says to me that we are chosen in Him as God had determined before the foundation of the world that we should be Holy and with out blame before Him.

This is what God determined before the foundation of the world;
"That we should be holy and with out blame before Him in love" There isn't any punchuation in Biblical Greek.
This verse says to me that we are chosen in Him as God had determined before the foundation of the world that we should be Holy and with out blame before Him.

THEN YOU SAY THIS ;


This is exactly what i was talking about.You have completely missed the passage. Do you believe the Apostle Paul was ignorant when he wrote these verses/.

I love the writings of Paul because they are truth. The only thing I missed thank God is Calvinism thought which isn't scriptural at all. If it had been I would have been like you.

If you look at the passages that teach truth and you resist the truth and try to explain them away, you will never come to truth.

You really should read this last statement over again and let it sink in. Then apply the same logic to your adding your own ideas to the scriptures when you read it.
MB

 

[MB]

Thank you. You did a much better job than I would have done, and besides, I had a long day at the machine shop, cut my finger and I don't feel like typing that much today.

Thanks Robert for your encouraging comments . I've read and like many of your comments as well.
MB

 

[MB]

Did you just apply the word "yet" to God? Are you an open theist?

You are completely misrepresenting that verse. The word "in" is simply denoting instrumentality in regards to how we were brought near to God (i.e. through the Blood of Christ), or perhaps "with".

In either case, it is saying that were chosen, not "choosing." Try again.

Are you Islamic?
MB

 

[Robert Snow]

Did you just apply the word "yet" to God? Are you an open theist?

It amazes me the lengths you go to to make someone say something they did not say in a effort to make them appear to be heretical.

Just because Calvinism is constantly proven to be in error, there is no need to stoop to such behavior.

 

[MB]

Skandelon, did you want an answer or an excuse to argue?

I gave you a reasoned answer. You offered no answer, just more argument.

What's your answer, and if you have one, why did you post a question -- oh, except to start another argument.

I'm starting to see a pattern here... It all wraps around "start an argument" and we could add, "with a Calvinist." :wavey:

Asthe Scriptures say:

Prov 26:21 [As] coals [are] to burning coals, and wood to fire; so [is] a contentious man to kindle strife.

1Cor 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

It also says;
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

I'm sure you just have no answer and that is what is bothering you most.
MB

 

[glfredrick]

It also says;
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

I'm sure you just have no answer and that is what is bothering you most.
MB

When have you found me lacking in answers?

 

[Winman]

Not at all. I, of course, do not believe God sends babies to hell, since the scriptures say sin is not counted where there is no law, however; that does not change the fact that by their nature they (and we) are vile, corrupt things deserving of God's wrath.

According to you, I suppose the vast number of people who will be in Heaven, not because Christ's blood covered their sins, but because of their own merit? Does that not seem problematic to you?

Also, why is it that people always cry about the unfairness of Adam's sin being imputed to us, as our representative, but no one ever whines about the unfairness of Christ's righteousness being applied to us believers (as our representative)?

That is a silly argument. If your doctrine is true, then a person is born doomed to spend eternity in hell because of Adam's sin. They did not choose this, they have no say in the matter whatsoever. That is as unjust as could possibly be.

But believeing on Christ is a personal choice. If we go to hell, it is because we willingly rejected Christ. This is just.

 

[Iconoclast]

winman,
you said;

That is a silly argument. If your doctrine is true, then a person is born doomed to spend eternity in hell because of Adam's sin. They did not choose this, they have no say in the matter whatsoever. That is as unjust as could possibly be.

But believeing on Christ is a personal choice. If we go to hell, it is because we willingly rejected Christ. This is just.

The bible doctrine is both true and just.Romans 5 is not unjust,but rather God given truth. You are ascribing evil to God saying that the consequence of the fall was not just. You should not do this.

If we go to hell, it is because we willingly rejected Christ. This is just.

[/QUOTE] No....all sin not paid for will result very justly in the sentence of second death. Rejecting Jesus is a sin, but many in hell will be there just for their sins which are not paid for...even if they never heard of Jesus.

 

[Rippon]

Also, why is it that people always cry about the unfairness of Adam's sin being imputed to us, as our representative, but no one ever whines about the unfairness of Christ's righteousness being applied to us believers (as our representative)?

Hear,hear. That needs to be broadcast loudly.

 

[Rippon]

The Bible doctrine is both true and just.Romans 5 is not unjust,but rather God given truth. You are ascribing evil to God saying that the consequence of the fall was not just. You should not do this.

I'm in the AMEN corner again. Romans 5 is denied by a number here. It's alarming how many Bible believers deny Scripture at this point.

No....all sin not paid for will result very justly in the sentence of second death. Rejecting Jesus is a sin, but many in hell will be there just for their sins which are not paid for...even if they never heard of Jesus.

Again --that's right.

 

[Winman]

winman,
you said;
The bible doctrine is both true and just.Romans 5 is not unjust,but rather God given truth. You are ascribing evil to God saying that the consequence of the fall was not just. You should not do this.
No....all sin not paid for will result very justly in the sentence of second death. Rejecting Jesus is a sin, but many in hell will be there just for their sins which are not paid for...even if they never heard of Jesus.

Romans 5 does not teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us, else you MUST believe in Universalism.

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

If the first phrase of this verse teaches that Adam's sin was imputed to all men, then the second phrase MUST teach that Christ's righteousness is imputed to all men.

We know that Christ's righteousness is not imputed to all men, therefore we know your interpretation of this verse is error. Romans 5 does not teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us, on the contrary, it teaches that death has passed on all men because of their own personal sin.

Saying we are MADE sinners by Adam's sin is speaking of his example and influence. For instance, many were made atheists by the writings of Charles Darwin. His beliefs were not imputed to people, but people became atheists by personally believeing his theory. Adam introduced sin and the corruption thereof into the world, by this influence many are made sinners. A pervert oftentimes begins by reading pornographic material. A person often becomes a drunk by the influence of their parents who drank. But the choice to sin is their's, it is not imposed on them as you falsely teach.

 

[Rippon]

Romans 5 does not teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us, else you MUST believe in Universalism.

Huh?! Universalism means that everyone will go to heaven --in brief.

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Romans 5 does not teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us, on the contrary, it teaches that death has passed on all men because of their own personal sin.
[/quote]

Incredible. You quote Romans 5:19 and then deny its import in your next breath. The passage does not address personal sin --but imputed sin.

Saying we are MADE sinners by Adam's sin is speaking of his example and influence.

That's pure Pelagianism --that Adam merely set a bad example for his descendants. You are voicing anti-biblical sentiments.

 

[Winman]

Huh?! Universalism means that everyone will go to heaven --in brief.

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Romans 5 does not teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us, on the contrary, it teaches that death has passed on all men because of their own personal sin.

Incredible. You quote Romans 5:19 and then deny its import in your next breath. The passage does not address personal sin --but imputed sin.
That's pure Pelagianism --that Adam merely set a bad example for his descendants. You are voicing anti-biblical sentiments.

First, I am not Pelagian whatsoever, Pelegius believed man could seek God without God's grace. I completely disagree with this. Without God revealing himself to us through his word, natural man would NEVER conceive of the true God or the gospel of Jesus Christ of himself. We can see this in people who have never heard the scriptures and worship idols. Pelagius was in serious error here. But I do believe that natural man can respond to this revelation.

Second, I know exactly what Universalism is. And if you interpret Romans 5 as teaching that Adam's sin is IMPUTED to us, or imposed on us, then you MUST also believe that Christ's righteousness is imputed or imposed on all men. This is how we can know that Romans 5 IS NOT teaching that Adam's sin is imputed, because we KNOW that Christ's righteousness is not imputed to all men.

You know exactly what I am saying, and you know what I am saying is correct. If Rom 5:19 says all men are made (imputed) sinners in Adam, then it also says all men are made (imputed) righteous in Christ. You can't get around this.

 

[jbh28]

We do if we are chosen in Him, just as scripture says.

The Scriptures say "before the foundation of the world." So unless you existed before the foundation of the world, then you didn't exist when you were chosen.

It isn't us that are chosen here but the future of those who get saved.

"he has chosen US" So yes, we are the ones being chosen here.

You can't be chosen here because you are not in Christ.

The election was in Christ. I didn't exist yet.

You hadn't even been thought of yet.

God isn't omniscient?

What was chosen before the foundation of the world is "that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:", once we are saved.

There simply is no election here at all as described by Calvinist. Especially a particular election.
MB

Sorry, but that isn't what the text says. It says, "even as he chose US." The object of the election is "US"