Do you really understand your 'opponents' views?

[jbh28]

You said Calvinists should be humble because God chose them, Michael is asking you what attitude those billions of people God has passed over should have.

I have actually seen Calvinists say that these "passed over" folks should be happy knowing that they are bringing glory to God.

Those that God "passes over" receive their deserved punishment. The attitude of those "passed over" would be that of rejection of God. People are sinners. All are sinners. All, including myself, deserve hell. We are sinners that have sinned against a holy God. We don't deserve salvation nor the chance to be saved. Salvation is by the grace of God. So, if God chooses me for salvation, it's nothing that I did to deserve it at all. The ones that God doesn't choose will receive their deserved punishment. Anyone that believes will be saved. God doesn't reject anyone that comes to him.

Calvinism turns all definitions on their head. In the OT, to be "passed over" meant to be saved, to the Calvinist it means to be lost.

Calvinists never seem to recognize this.

context context. context..... Obviously two different things are being spoken of here.

But you did give me a good laugh. (It was meant as a joke correct?)

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Hey, I am just a redneck from Arkansas. I am lucky to even be able to type this post.

John

And I'm your next door neighbor, and I'm lucky to be able to type a post in response to yours.

 

[jbh28]

No, Calvinists are special

If they werent then God wouldnt have chosen them.

John

No, we did nothing to deserve God's election.

Posting false things isn't a good thing. But if you want to be hostile, that's ok. You can treat me as an enemy if you want, but I'll continue to treat you as a brother in Christ.

 

[quantumfaith]

NO!

....or at least I don't think so. I believe it to be an accurate, brief definition of the free will soteriology.

I believe the REAL problem with it is that it represents a 'label', you know, like Calvinist, or hyper, or something.

Thank You, I feel absolutely no shame in being labeled a synergist.

 

[seekingthetruth]

No, we did nothing to deserve God's election.

Posting false things isn't a good thing. But if you want to be hostile, that's ok. You can treat me as an enemy if you want, but I'll continue to treat you as a brother in Christ.

Hey brother, it's not you personally that is an enemy. Good gracious NO!

It is the theology that denies salvation to "whosoever will" that is the enemy.

John

 

[seekingthetruth]

No, we did nothing to deserve God's election.

Posting false things isn't a good thing. But if you want to be hostile, that's ok. You can treat me as an enemy if you want, but I'll continue to treat you as a brother in Christ.

As a matter of fact, I thank God that you are a born again Christian. We may disagree as to the way we became Christians, but the bottom line is what really matters.


No brother, i dont see you as an enemy at all. I am concerned with the doctrine of denial. If God denies some people even the choice of salvation then most of the Bible is just worthless babbling.

John

 

[jbh28]

Hey brother, it's not you personally that is an enemy. Good gracious NO!

Good brother!

It is the theology that denies salvation to "whosoever will" that is the enemy.

John

But we don't believe that God denies salvation to whosoever will. We don't for a minute. We believe that people reject God because they don't want to come to him, not that that people come to him and God rejects them.

Here's something that CJ Mahaney said once. God is not standing at the gate of heaven with people coming to him and he chooses some and reject others. That would deny "whosoever will."

Now, let me stop and say that God could do that if he wanted to. Man has no right to ask for forgiveness. God doesn't have to pay for any man's sin. I don't believe God does this at all, but that he could if he wanted to. Salvation is not deserved.

What election does teach is that God is at the gate of heaven calling for all men everywhere to repent and come to him. All men turn their own way and reject him. He chooses some of these to save.

The reason you look at election in the first type is from your perspective. We all do this from time to time. We look at the other person's view and see it from our perspective.

If God denies some people even the choice of salvation then most of the Bible is just worthless babbling.

John

I don't believe God denies anyone the choice of Salvation as he has made an offer to all that believe. What I do believe is that man will never want to come to Christ until the Holy Spirit convicts his heart. Where my disagreement with some will lie is that I don't believe the Spirit ever fails in convicting a heart. Man has a choice, but he chooses against God. I would have chosen against God unless the Spirit convicted my heart. It's a change of my heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh.

 

[jbh28]

Well, I'm about to head to Bible study. (no, we're not talking about Calvinism ) Actually we are talking about discipling other believers and evangelizing the lost.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Perhaps you think you made a choice, but simply recognized you were chosen and saved.

Yes, that is precisely what happens....everyone felt this in their heart of hearts... they really did....They were convicted by the Holy Spirit that THEY had been chosen.....it is now their purpose to take their particular place at their Heavenly Father's side... That is PRECISELY what I knew and felt in my heart of hearts when I got saved. Nope..I didn't want my fire insurance.....I had an intellectual epiphany that I was eternally predestined and cenceded the principles of Calvinism.... don't we all. That is almost word for word my testimony when I share with a non-believer.

 

[seekingthetruth]

Good brother!

But we don't believe that God denies salvation to whosoever will. We don't for a minute. We believe that people reject God because they don't want to come to him, not that that people come to him and God rejects them.

Here's something that CJ Mahaney said once. God is not standing at the gate of heaven with people coming to him and he chooses some and reject others. That would deny "whosoever will."

Now, let me stop and say that God could do that if he wanted to. Man has no right to ask for forgiveness. God doesn't have to pay for any man's sin. I don't believe God does this at all, but that he could if he wanted to. Salvation is not deserved.

What election does teach is that God is at the gate of heaven calling for all men everywhere to repent and come to him. All men turn their own way and reject him. He chooses some of these to save.

The reason you look at election in the first type is from your perspective. We all do this from time to time. We look at the other person's view and see it from our perspective.



I don't believe God denies anyone the choice of Salvation as he has made an offer to all that believe. What I do believe is that man will never want to come to Christ until the Holy Spirit convicts his heart. Where my disagreement with some will lie is that I don't believe the Spirit ever fails in convicting a heart. Man has a choice, but he chooses against God. I would have chosen against God unless the Spirit convicted my heart. It's a change of my heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh.

So you believe in man's freewill?

John

 

[seekingthetruth]

Well, I'm about to head to Bible study. (no, we're not talking about Calvinism ) Actually we are talking about discipling other believers and evangelizing the lost.

I am not trying to be a smart aleck

But if God chose His people before we ever even born, then why do you need to evangelise the lost?

Does God need you to do His job for Him?

John

 

[HeirofSalvation]

We believe that people reject God because they don't want to come to him,

AND......you also believe that God irreparably predestined them to be BORN in a condition wherein they by their very nature are inescapably predisposed to that end, but you did not mention that factoid.... I don't know why...could not possibly guess why. Calvinists always forget that.

God is not standing at the gate of heaven with people coming to him and he chooses some and reject others.

No, he is creating some irrevocably incapable of coming to him, and others irrresistably drawn to him.

What election does teach is that God is at the gate of heaven calling for all men everywhere to repent and come to him.

Yes, that....and that he has no intention whatsoever of enabling the ones he doesn't feel like saving to respond possitively to his call. Why not include that in the statement?

he has made an offer to all that believe.

and again has no intention to save those irrevocably predetermined not to believe. Was this just an opportunity for a Calvinist to positively use the word ALL? I know the opportunities are few and far between, take it when you can get it.

Man has a choice,

Yes, he has the "choice" between option A or option A......is there any REAL ontological sense in which he/she might have taken option B?...................NO they were irrevocably predisposed to the option they would invariably take.

 

[jbh28]

I am not trying to be a smart aleck

But if God chose His people before we ever even born, then why do you need to evangelise the lost?

Does God need you to do His job for Him?

John

These are not bad questions. To answer the 2nd question, no, God doesn't "need" us. God could save anyway he wants. However, two answer your first, he has chosen that he will use the foolishness of preaching His gospel to save people. We evangelizing the lost is the means by which God saves.

 

[jbh28]

So you believe in man's freewill?

John

I believe man can choose anything he desires. The only limits are on what he desires. I don't believe the natural man desires to come to Christ, so therefore he never chooses to come to Christ.

 

[jbh28]

HeirofSalvation If you want to actually address my views and not a straw man, I'll have a conversation with you. otherwise, your hostility will be ignored.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

HeirofSalvation If you want to actually address my views and not a straw man, I'll have a conversation with you. otherwise, your hostility will be ignored.

Those are Calvinist views, nothing I said misrepresents them: you would have corrected them otherwise.

not a straw man,

That accurately represents Calvinism/ your "Straw Man" accusation - is an attempt at a Red Herring.

hostility

Gird up thy loins now like a man :tear:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

It would be refreshing if we all could post our views without resorting to demeaning the "other side." We are all on the same side. We are believers. And even more than that, we are all baptist. We differ on some views which is why we debate, but let's not treat some as lesser.

Posting false things isn't a good thing. But if you want to be hostile, that's ok. You can treat me as an enemy if you want, but I'll continue to treat you as a brother in Christ.

hostility

Wow touchy much? Acuse the dissenters of being meany-heads. I like that tactic

 

[jbh28]

Those are Calvinist views, nothing I said misrepresents them: you would have corrected them otherwise.


That accurately represents Calvinism/ your "Straw Man" accusation - is an attempt at a Red Herring.

Gird up thy loins now like a man :tear:

No, they are a misrepsentation of my views and other Calvinists views. It was a straw man. Again, I have no reason to discuss doctrine with someone that is hostile such as yourself. You're not interested in debate but to insult.

Let me know when you want to discuss my actual views and not your straw man version.

 

[convicted1]

I understand the intended joke, just not going to let it slide by, Iconoclasts post was an accurate description, so all the thumbs and applause response are a reaction to an innacurate post by skan. As I said, one time it is a gift, the next it is within mans ability so he says. Both sides of the fence being played...twisting, turning, dodging, things along those lines.

Now, I have not read all of Brother Skan's posts, but the one I "thumbs" and "applause" was something I was in complete agreement. None of us woke up one morning and stated, "You know, there is a God", and did this of our own volition. It takes God to cause us to see how vile we really are.


Take a homeless drunk with liver trouble. Someone sees him, and has pity on him, and gives him some money to buy some food. W/O that money being given to him, he could not buy anything whatsoever. He was/is helpless to do anything about it. After that person gave him that money, he can now buy some food to eat. However, he chooses to buy the booze, and he ends up dying from liver failure.

This is a caricature of us. We are helpless in our fallen state. W/O a work from the Lord, we would all die lost. When God grants us the gift of faith, we can choose to believe Him, or not. We do not die from a lack of atonement, but from a lack of belief. Some take the gift of faith, and exchange it for a lie.

The gift of faith can excahnged for a lie, and they will die eternally because of it.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

No, they are a misrepsentation of my views and other Calvinists views. It was a straw man. Again, I have no reason to discuss doctrine with someone that is hostile such as yourself. You're not interested in debate but to insult.

Let me know when you want to discuss my actual views and not your straw man version.

hostile such as yourself.

seriously.... calm down.... Why not just take my post and explain how it is inaccurate? You can't. Plainly speaking, it is an accurate representation of Calvinsit Theology. Are you avoiding actually defending the belief by whining about "hostility" I think you are. You don't like someone exposing what Calvinism really teaches/ and you have (clearly) a rhetorical gift for stating its premises in the best concievable light. You conveniently left out the parts I supplied for you. I should be thanked. Your "straw-man" is a red-herring as is the "hostility". Stop whining :tear: and expose my error.